Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Science in court: Head case

Last year, functional magnetic resonance imaging made its debut in court. Virginia Hughes asks whether the technique is ready to weigh in on the fate of murderers.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Get just this article for as long as you need it


Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout


  1. Davatzikos, C. et al. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 62, 1218-1227 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Weisberg, D. S., Keil, F. C., Goodstein, J., Rawson, E. & Gray, J. R. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 20, 470-477 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Kiehl, K. A. et al. Psychiatry Res. 130, 297-312 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references


Additional information

See Editorial, page 325 , News Features, pages 344 and 347 , Opinion, page 351 , and online at .

Virginia Hughes is a freelance writer in New York City.

Related links

Related links

Related external links

Kent Kiehl's website

Ruben Gur's website

MacArthur Foundation's Law and Neuroscience Project

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hughes, V. Science in court: Head case. Nature 464, 340–342 (2010).

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:

This article is cited by


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing