|
|
|
Table of Contents
Volume 5, Issue 5
|
Feature:
Defining Evil
A Depravity Scale for Today’s Courts
For years, the behavioral sciences have maintained distance from explaining evil acts and evil minds. The result? A lingering gap between criminal responsibility and morality for which no explanation is offered. A lack of direction continues to force courts to employ arbitrary standards for wickedness.
Legislative Update:
Legislative Update for May 4, 2001
- Arizona fails to pass law to collect DNA from all felons
- Virginia offender DNA database would
have missed 85% of the state’s “cold hits” if property crimes had not been
included on the database
- Iowa and Washington table crime lab building efforts for lack of funding
Legislative Update:
Legislative Update for May 11, 2001
- Kansas passes a measure to expand the state database to include burglars
- Virginia’s governor sign much aniticpated post conviction bill.
- Defense lawyers are forming a national
task force to investigate “corruption” in state crime labs
Legislative Update:
Legislative Update for May 18, 2001
- New Jersey Senated has introduced "John Doe" legislation
- US Senate considers whether the National Forensic Science Improvement Act needs full funding
- Oklahoma measure to assess fees to pay for crime lab improvements is gaining ground
Legislative Update:
Legislative Update for May 25, 2001
- Illinois to review and revise DNA procedures at state crime labe
- New York Supreme Court upholds DNA statutes
- US House panel demands explanation on DNA backlog problem
Recent Cases:
No Reversal Despite Expert's Later Flip
Analyst Concedes Flaw in ID of Blood
The defendant continues to appeal an early harbinger of Daubert, twenty-five years after an expert testified about blood on a pair of boots and helped to link the defendant to the murder victim. The expert now admits that his tests were unreliable.
Recent Cases:
Experience for Police Drug ID Takes Hit
Recognizing Toluene Not Enough
Officers responding to a buglary report find a man disoriented, with poor balance, and a liquid filled bottle near a soaked rag. The officers believe the substance to be a sniffing glue and arrest.
Recent Cases:
Instruction Unfairly Endorses DNA
Despite Statute Parallel, Court Reverses
In a Virginia rape trial, the judge instructs the jury that state law deems DNA testing reliable to prove identity—which it does. Yet the state Court of Appeals finds that the judge impermissibly emphasized the evidence, and reverses the conviction.
Recent Cases:
How the Expert Affected Me
Barred Handwriting Testimony Gets Second Chance
The defendant bungles the expert-witness disclosure requirement, and the court bars the handwriting expert from the stand. The plaintiff now wants to stop an investigator from testifying about the expert’s report. Is this a ploy to back-door the expert’s opinion around the procedural blunder?
Recent Cases:
Sequestration Cuts DNA Lifeline
Expert Cannot Only Be Helpful
DNA was a complex matter that the defense attorney found somewhat confusing, and he wanted his expert witness to sit at counsel table to assist in cross-examining. But witnesses were sequestered.
Recent Cases:
Worsening Is Close Enough to Cause
Pre-Existing Illness Endangered Cop Pension
If on-the-job trauma was not the sole cause of this police officer’s mental illness, is he still entitled to a disability pension?
Recent Cases:
Not in Report, Not in Court?
Right-Wrong Testimony No Surprise
A wife slaps her husband during a heated argument. When the local hospital didn’t seem interested in helping him, the 'victim' gets his son’s 30/30 rifle and drove around, looking for trouble. He found it.
Recent Cases:
What's in the Psych Methodology?
Exam Time, Timing, Testing Are Tested
Eric Walker was just an engineer trainee when a locomotive accident sent him to the emergency room with a forehead laceration. Did the accident cause him to commit suicide three years later?
Recent Cases:
Bogus Psychologist Dooms Defendant
No Credentials, Silly Testimony Overlook IQ
A homicide defendant’s expert witness testifies so pitiably that the courtroom gallery laughs, and a jury condemns the defendant to die. What is trial counsel’s duty to investigate the background of an apparently experienced expert?
|
|
|
|
