Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 01 NOVEMBER 2024

Re-Examining Claims Of Self-Defense

Our law doesn't always keep pace with teachings from science, psychology, brain development, or mental health.

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Our law doesn't always keep pace with teachings from science, psychology, brain development, or mental health. But when it finally catches up, it is indeed newsworthy. For example, it was in 2012, when in State v. Guilbert, fueled by the Identification Task Force chaired by Justice Borden, and in recognition of the developments in the cognitive science of eyewitness identification, the Supreme Court established new rules for cases in which eyewitness identification evidence is proffered. ("[E]xpert testimony on eyewitness identification is admissible upon a determination by the trial court that the expert is qualified, and the proffered testimony is relevant and will aid the jury.")

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from