Abstract
In the criminal process, the fact finders assess the validity of impressions reported by witnesses based on their perceptions and determine what has happened in reality. However, these impressions are not subject to any external validity check. The Innocence Project revealed the failure of this subjective method and showed how it can lead to innocent convictions. The legal literature has examined ways to manage the risk of mistakes, but these ways are inconsistent with the scientific understanding of the need for external validity measurements, suggesting the need for new ways of thinking about the legal search for truth and justice.
Reference72 articles.
1. Deciding, “What Happened?” when we don't really know: finding theoretical grounding for legitimate judicial fact-finding;Acharya;Can. J. Law Jurisprudence,2020
2. Why eyewitness fail;Albright;Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.,2017
3. A clearer view: the impact of the national academy of sciences report on eyewitness identification;Albright;Judicature,2020
4. Breakthrough Percepts of Famous Faces;Alsufyani;Psychophysiology.,2019
5. Olfactory sniffing signals consciousness in unresponsive patients with brain injuries;Arzi;Nature.,2020
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献