When a Picture is Not Worth a Thousand Words

The George Washington Law Review Arguendo, vol. 84, pp. 178-91 (2016)

14 Pages Posted: 2 Dec 2016 Last revised: 17 Jan 2020

See all articles by Andreas Kuersten

Andreas Kuersten

Georgetown University - Center for Clinical Bioethics

Date Written: November 30, 2016

Abstract

It is frequently put forth that the admission of neuroimaging evidence at criminal trials introduces the substantial risk of these sophisticated and visual presentations unduly influencing factfinders. As such, this Essay analyzes how brain image evidence might have this effect. Particularly, it focuses on the situation in which such evidence is proffered in support of mens rea and affirmative defense determinations, such as insanity. The Essay assesses the actual evidentiary value of neuroimaging evidence in these evaluations. It then presents relevant studies supporting and opposing the contention that this evidence unduly influences factfinders beyond its true explanatory power. Finally, given the current state of research into this issue, this Essay puts forth a prospective manner in which brain images might inordinately influence finders of fact and a path for further study.

Keywords: Neuroimaging, Neurolaw, Criminal Law, Evidence, Brain Images, Neuroscience, Forensic Science, Fact Finders, Judges, Juries

JEL Classification: K14, K40

Suggested Citation

Kuersten, Andreas, When a Picture is Not Worth a Thousand Words (November 30, 2016). The George Washington Law Review Arguendo, vol. 84, pp. 178-91 (2016), Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2878876

Andreas Kuersten (Contact Author)

Georgetown University - Center for Clinical Bioethics ( email )

4000 Reservoir Road, N.W., Bldg. D, Rm 236
Washington, DC 20007-2197
United States

Here is the Coronavirus
related research on SSRN

Paper statistics

Downloads
341
Abstract Views
1,427
rank
96,080
PlumX Metrics