DNA and the Changing Face of Justice

Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences

Volumn 38, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 97-106

  Goodman Delahunty, Jane ^a   Tait, David ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CANBERRA   (Australia)

Author keywords

CSI effect; DNA; Expert evidence; Forensic; Jury; Probabilistic

Indexed keywords

CRIMINAL JUSTICE; DNA DETERMINATION; FORENSIC IDENTIFICATION; HUMAN; MEDICAL RESEARCH; NONRESPONSE BIAS; REVIEW; SIMULATION;

EID: 33947246522     PISSN: 00450618     EISSN: 1834562X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00450610609410636     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Chavaud F: L'expertise ou l’ait d'administrer les preuves au tourant du siècle. In l'Association françaises pour l'histoire de la justice, La cour d’assises: Bilan d'un héritage démocratique. La Documentation Française, Paris, 161-172,2001.
2. Vidmar N & Diamond S: Juries and expert evidence. Brooklyn Law Rexiew, 66:1121-1180,2001.
3. A stale of denial: Texas justice and the death penalty. Texas Defender Service, 25, hup://www.deathpenaltvinfo.ory/articlc.php?scid=19&did=22l (accessed Octobcr 28 2006).
4. Thompson W C: A sociological perspective on the science of forensic DNA testing. U.C. Davis Law Review, 30:1113-1136,1997.
5. Cooley C M: Reforming the forensic science community to avert the ultimate injustice. Stanford Law and Policy Review, 15:381-441,2004.
6. Walsh SJ, Ribaux O, Buckleton JS, Ross A, and Roux C: DNA profiling and criminal justice: A contribution to a changing debate. Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences, 36: 34-43,2004.
7. Ohio Courts Futures Commission: Report: A changing landscape. Supreme Court of Ohio, Columbus, 2001.
8. Haeslcr A: DNA for defence lawyers. NSW Public Defenders Office, Sydney, 2005.
9. Houck M M: CSI: Reality. Scientific American, 67-71 (July, 2006).
10. Podlas K: “The CSI cffect": Exposing the media myth. Fordham Intellectual Property Media and Entertainment Law Journal, 16:429-465,2006.
11. Battye G. Media representations and CSI effects. Presentation at the Research Symposium: DNA Evidence; The CSI EfTcct, University of Canberra School of Law, Canberra, July 2006; (10) Supra p. 433.
12. Willing R: “CSI effect" has juries wanting more evidence. USA Today, 01A, Aug 5,2004.
13. Tyler T: Viewing CSI and the threshold of guilt: Managing truth and justice in reality and fiction. Yale Law'Journal, 115:1050-1085,2006.
14. Goodman, J: Jurors' comprehension and assessment of probabilistic evidence. American Journal of Trial Advocacy, 16: 361-389, 1992.
15. Briody M: The effects of DNA evidence on sexual offence cases in court. Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 14:159-181,2003.
16. Nance DA and Morris SB: Jury understanding of DNA evidence: An empirical assessment of presentation formats for trace evidence with relatively small probability. The Journal of Legal Studies, 34: 395-444,2005.
17. Dartnall S and Goodman-Delahunty J: Enhancing juror understanding of probabilistic DNA evidence. Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences, xxx-xxx, 2006.
18. Saks, M J and Kidd, R F: Human information processing and adjudication: Trial by heuristics. Law & Society Review, 15, 123-159. 1980-1981.
19. Champod, C: The Strength of Scientific Evidence: DNA. Fingerprints and the Illusion of Certainty. Presentation at the Department of Forensic Medicine. University of Technology, Sydney, Feb. 2006.
20. Findlay M: Juror comprehension and the hard case-making forensic evidence simpler. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies. 2006. in press.
21. Findlay M and Grix J: Challenging forensic evidence? Observations on the use of DNA in certain criminal trials. Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 14: 269-283, 2003
22. Cans J and Urbas G: DNA identification in the criminal justice system, Trends and Issues it1 Crime and Criminal Justice 226: 1-6, 2002.