Adam wrote, in response to this post: I'm willing to accept that the protesters actions (or any action for that matter) are wrong, but not on the basis of such a bald statement as the "protesters' acts are legal, but wrong." Wrong because you say so? Wrong because a vast majority of society disapproves of their actions? Wrong because rude is the same thing as wrong? Admittedly,

Sometimes a polygraph ("lie detector") examination report is helpful in the defense of a criminal case. Such reports are not generally admissible at trial, so that the jury will probably never see the report. But it might be a useful tool in convincing either the prosecutor or the grand jury not to proceed with the case. Sometimes I see criminal-defense lawyers offering to let prosecutors' polygraph examiners

Scott Greenfield gives us a beautiful Independence Day post, 231 Years and Still Trying. Read it today. Scott evokes three interrelated themes that I'll explore in coming days: The nature of freedom; The power of fear; and The abandonment of American ideals. Technorati Tags: America, blawgs, freedom, philosophy, fear

If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.-- Samuel Adams They tell us, sir, that we are weak;

I have written about traumatic brain injury (TBI) in the criminal justice system here and here and here. Here is a post about traumatic brain injury (TBI) from the Neurophilosophy blog, describing how TBI happens (especially in a war zone) and the effect that it has on the brain. An excerpt: Neurologists affiliated with the U. S. military now estimate that up to 30% of troops who

One of the president's justifications for the commutation of Scooter Libby's sentence is that Libby "was handed a harsh sentence based in part on allegations never presented to the jury." What the president probably doesn't know is that this is how federal sentencing works. The jury determines whether the government has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the crime with which he is charged

The statutory minimum sentence for a crime is the smallest sentence that the legislature allows a judge to give a person convicted of that crime. For example, in Texas the statutory minimum for possession of more than 400 grams of cocaine with intent to distribute is 15 years in prison. The statutory maximum, likewise, is the largest sentence that the legislature allows a judge to give a

Anne Reed at Deliberations wrote today about Spencer's analysis of the NCSC study data, summarizing some of the reactions across the blawgosphere. Having slept on the report, I'll address a couple of the criticisms. First, jury critics call for an end to the jury system. This analysis does not support that. Spencer estimates that juries are 87% accurate by assuming that judges are equally accurate. The analysis

The criminal defense world is abuzz over this analysis (PDF), which estimated that juries in a recent National Center for State Courts (NCSC) study reached "accurate" verdicts only 87% of the time. In the 290 cases analyzed, the author, Bruce D. Spencer of Northwestern University, estimated that 10% of convictions were wrongful, and that the chance of an innocent person being convicted was 25%. Spencer makes it

Scott Henson (Grits For Breakfast) gives us this post describing Twila Hugley Earle's speech to the Restorative Justice Conference in Kerrville. Earle spoke of the application (or, maybe more accurately, analogization) of chaos theory (Scott defines it as "the study of how turbulence transforms into order organically") to criminal justice: The Newtonian worldview sees both change and order mechanically, but reality is more dynamic. Chaos theory offers