Professor Shari Diamond Examines the Interplay of Science and the Law

04.25.2019

Scholarship Faculty
Professor Shari Diamond

Attorneys and judges are not the only important actors in the U.S. legal system. Laypersons and experts also play key roles. Important questions about how these groups — most notably juries and scientific experts — interact with the legal system have long been at the heart of Shari Diamond’s research. How do juries reach decisions? How can scientific evidence best be communicated to triers of fact? What would make knowledgeable scientific experts more inclined to assist in legal proceedings? “Science & the Legal System” was the focus of the Fall 2018 issue of Daedalus, Journal of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, which Diamond co-edited. 

律师和社会心理学家,莎丽塞德曼钻石,霍华德学家trienens法律教授,并在美国律师基金会研究教授,入选了2012年艺术与科学(学院)美国科学院学院,成立于1780年,是国内历史最悠久的学术团体之一,与从学科门类齐全的杰出思想家的成员选举产生。钻石,自1999年谁一直在十大网赌网站网址-最新网站教学,是教师的引用最多的学者之一,也许是她的奖学金与陪审团的决策最有名的。她的学术著作已经引述美国最高法院和她进行了独到的研究在实际民事陪审团商议研究陪审员的行为。 “审议项目,比什么都重要,使我确信的在陪审团室发生了什么的重要性,”她说。

最近,钻石已经把注意力转向法律决策的另一个方面:科学和法律制度之间的交叉点。 “我已经被我看到在法庭上的科学知识可疑索赔惊惶,也解读我的科学证据过程中的情况,”她说。与前学院院长乔纳森fanton会议,钻石建议,学院的成员将是一个很好的小组,帮助她解决一些有关科学家和法律体系之间的相互作用问题。 “学院的成员包括杰出的科学家和工程师,所以我想知道,他们是否经常被要求提供解决法律纠纷相关证据?他们愿意搞?什么是他们与整个法律体系的相互作用及其对这些相互作用的反应?”

These questions were also informed by Diamond’s own experience as an expert witness — she has testified about deceptive advertising and survey research in trademark cases. “I wanted to understand whether there were problems not just with getting researchers to participate in hearings, but also in making what they present in the legal system more understandable to the decision-makers, both judges and jurors.”

Her interest in this topic coincided with an initiative the Academy was launching on the public face of science, and so Diamond received support to start working on what would become a Daedalus issue with contributions from top legal and scientific minds, including an article that she wrote with her co-editor of the issue, Richard O. Lempert, Eric Stein Distinguished University Professor of Law and Sociology, emeritus, at the University of Michigan.

在工作的有关科学的相互作用与法制杂志的问题 - “两个领域[即]在许多方面是文化独特,”编辑写 - 钻石和lempert从一开始就确定这两个学科编织在一起。 “我们想掩盖的问题,科学的法律体系中拼杀的范围内,我们也希望有文章写的,只要有可能,通过对科学家和法律学者,”钻石说。那些对包括JED秒。拉科夫,纽约南部地区的美国地方法院的美国高级地方法院法官,和伊丽莎白·洛夫特斯,国家对人的记忆和心理科学的杰出教授和加州大学的法律主要专家之一,尔湾分校法律,是谁写的“不准确的目击者识别棘手;”和丹尼尔·鲁宾菲尔德,在纽约大学法学院法学教授和乔·塞西尔,高级研究员及项目主任研究师在联邦司法中心,是谁写的关于挑战的科学证据为姿势法官和陪审团。因为促进整个科学规律鸿沟相互理解可能是朝着进步的第一步,这些跨学科的配对是特别重要的。 “对于其他文化有了更深的理解,而且要经过很长的路要走,”钻石说。

In their own article, “When Law Calls, Does Science Answer? A Survey of Distinguished Scientists and Engineers,” 金刚石和lempert描述了该学院的在诉讼中的合作,这质疑杰出的科学家和工程师对自己观点的法律制度,包括是什么促使他们参与(或不)进行的一项调查的结果,当记者问及他们的经验时他们是这样。而大多数的366名专家他们调查被要求在一些点作为专家证人,且大多同意这样做至少一次,有的表示怀疑有关法律程序和积极响应修改建议,包括提出反对专家证词在审判期间背靠背,或具有相对的专家制作了一份联合报告呼叫协议和分歧的领域。科学证据是复杂的,毕竟和非科学家 - 无论是法官或陪审员 - 经常会发现它具有挑战性的理解和应用。

“My particular interest right now is in enabling opposing experts to clarify the issues of disagreement between them,” Diamond says. “Why should the decision-makers — the judges and jurors — have to sort through completely different presentations often separated by days of other testimony? Why can’t some greater effort be made to identify their areas of agreement and disagreement? A good attorney who is well-prepared can help with that, but structurally our procedures tend to undermine direct engagement by putting expert presentations in separate silos. That approach is not productive if you are trying to come up with informed answers.”

做研究和建立编辑问题给了她多年的机会,认真思考各种关于主题,从指纹单独监禁的法律和科学之间的相互作用。 “幸运的是,与学院的帮助下,我们能够争取正是我们想要的作者,并与他们见面在2017年夏天在剑桥学院,讨论第一稿。我们当时花了明年编辑“。其结果是文章的集合钻石视为一个强有力的步骤,弥合法律科学鸿沟。 “我们提出了影响案件在全国各地法庭正在审理及时的问题,”她说。 “但是,我们还提供了关于科学和法律之间未来的关系乐观一些真正原因。”