We use cookies to improve your experience with our site. | More info.

Specials

See all specials

Science in Court

Forensic science evolved less as a conventional academic discipline and more as a service driven by the needs of law enforcement. As a result, the vast majority of its day-to-day tools — from fingerprint analysis to hair- and fibre-matching — have developed without the influence and scrutiny of conventional academic research. In this special, Nature examines the gap between academia and the forensic lab, and explores ways in which the two areas can come together to put science in court on a stronger footing.

News

Editorial

  • Intelligent testing

    Science has a part to play in ensuring protection for defendants with intellectual disabilities.

    ( )

  • Forensics fiasco

    Inconsistent standards and a lack of research investment have left UK legal science in chaos.

    ( )

  • Science in court

    Academics are too often at loggerheads with forensic scientists. A new framework for certification, accreditation and research could help to heal the breach.

    ( )

Features

  • Neuroscience in court: The painful truth

    Brain-scanning techniques promise to give an objective measure of whether someone is in pain, but researchers question whether they are reliable enough for the courtroom.

    ( )

  • Science in court: Disease detectives

    A powerful method for deducing microbial relationships has been edging its way into civil and criminal investigations. But courts should proceed with caution.

    ( )

  • Science in court: Smart enough to die?

    The US Supreme Court years ago ruled against applying the death penalty to people unable to understand the legal process. Now it must grapple with the science of how intellectual disability is measured.

    ( )

  • Arrested Development

    Neuroscience shows that the adolescent brain is still developing. The question is whether that should influence the sentencing of juveniles.

    ( )

  • The cell division

    Oliver Brüstle fought for more than a decade to pursue and patent human embryonic stem-cell research in Germany. Now his efforts have backfired.

    ( )

  • At fault?

    In 2009, an earthquake devastated the Italian city of L'Aquila and killed more than 300 people. Now, scientists are on trial for manslaughter.

    ( )

  • Taking aim at free will

    Scientists think they can prove that free will is an illusion. Philosophers are urging them to think again.

    ( )

  • Science in court

    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.

    ( )

  • The fine print

    A single incriminating fingerprint can land someone in jail. But, Laura Spinney finds, there is little empirical basis for such certainty.

    ( )

  • DNA's identity crisis

    It may be the gold-standard of forensic science, but questions are now being raised about DNA identification from ever-smaller human traces. Natasha Gilbert asks how low can you go.

    ( )

Opinion

Audio & Video

  • Pod Extra: David Eagleman

    A neuroscientist discusses how neuroscience could change the way we think about criminal behaviour and punishment.

    ( )

  • Nature Podcast: 18 March 2010

    In this week's Nature Podcast Kerri Smith talks with Virginia Hughes about the use of functional magnetic resonance imaging in the courtroom, and with Natasha Gilbert about low copy number DNA testing.

    ( )

Elsewhere in Nature