메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
저널정보
한국형사법학회 형사법연구 형사법연구 제22권 제4호
발행연도
2010.1
수록면
255 - 278 (24page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
A number of neurosience techniques have been developed, including electroencephalophy(EEG) and positron emission tomography(PET). In recent years development efforts over the past decade have increasingly focused on fMRI. Developments in neuroimaging has facilitated new research investigations into normal human brain functioning and have provided important new sights into the mechanisms of many neurological and psychiatric disorders. Brain images are becoming more common in courts in America. Some lawyers and neuroscientists are critical of introducing a brain images as legal evidence in criminal courts. Therefor, before admitting to introduce functional brain images in criminal trials, court must answer these central questions: How probative for criminal responsibility is the brain images? and whether the brain images confuse or mislead, how dangerous is the brain image? Does its danger substantially outweigh its probative value?We should focus on the extent to which brain images could be used to reduce responsibility, not to establish it. Brain images are sometimes offered to show that a particular defendant is abnormal in some way that is claimed to remove or reduce criminal responsibility. But even if in many cases the defendants has a functional abnormality that is correlated with violent crime, correlation does not prove causation. To be relevant to criminal responsibility, it is not enough for the brain image to disclose an abnormality that caused the criminal behavior. Any data regarding brain structure or function is unlikely sufficiently contemporaneous to the time of the crime to be meaningful. Because of this scientific uncertainties, the use of data from brain images in the courts has to be admittable in restrictive conditions. In recent brain scan might be admissible in some situations, such as capital sentencing. We carefully consider the question, whether brain images bring more harm than good to criminal trials. Some lawyers and neuroscientists answer that only time and carefully analysis will tell. We need to determine the error rates of various methods in neuroscience and to prepare the basic guidelines of using brain images as legal evidence and establish appropriate rules governing the burden of proof.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (33)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0