Abstract
The article discusses the use of neurological evidence, such as brain scans, in courts and how their use could transform judicial views regarding personal credibility and responsibility. According to the author, courts rarely allow the admission of brain scans as evidence at trial for legalistic and scientific reasons. He notes that as neuroscience progresses, judges may see scans as relevant to legal arguments about a defendant's mental state or the credibility of a witness. Topics include how brain science can influence law by providing a better understanding of the neurological causes of antisocial or illegal behavior while challenging traditional ideas about personal responsibility and just punishments. INSETS: A Neurological Struggle with Temptation;Before Brain Scans Can Be Evidence.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
