Negligence, Belief, Blame and Criminal Liability: The Special Case of Forgetting

Commentators seemingly agree about what negligence is—and how it is contrasted from recklessness. They also appear to concur about whether particular examples (both real and hypothetical) portray negligence. I am less confident about each of these matters. I explore the distinction between recklessness and negligence by examining a type of case that has generated a good deal of critical discussion: those in which a defendant forgets that he has created a substantial and unjustifiable risk of harm. Even in this limited kind of example, no single perspective on blame and liability proves to be defensible. Nonetheless, a discussion of this type of case is helpful because it enables us to appreciate the difficulties in understanding the nature of negligence and the ensuing uncertainty about whether penal liability for negligence is ever warranted.     

Skeletal indicators of pregnancy and parturition: a historical review

Over a century of scientific literature has documented the research and analysis relating to the possible skeletal evidence of pregnancy, parturition, and childcare, yet today, there still exists variation in methodology and interpretation. Historical perspective facilitates understanding of the growth and development of the theories and research currently available to the forensic science community. Review of the relevant literature clearly indicates that specific skeletal alterations are not exclusively connected to obstetrical events. Although parturition and related events have been shown to leave various alterations on bone, the research record also demonstrates that other factors can contribute to the same or similar changes. Additionally, such alterations can often be found in nulliparous women and men and are frequently absent in parous and multiparous women. This literature review calls for the continued exploration of skeletal alterations for determining parity status in human skeletal remains.     

Epidemiological characteristics of male sexual assault in a criminological database

Sexual assault among males, compared with females, is understudied, and may also be significantly underreported. Past studies have relied primarily on population-based survey data to estimate the prevalence of sexual assault and associated health outcomes. However, survey-based studies rely primarily on self-reports of victimization and may not accurately estimate the true prevalence of male sexual assault victimization. In order to obtain a detailed assessment of sexual assault among males, criminological databases like the National Incident Based Reporting System (NIBRS) may provide an important and unique source of information. The objective of the current study was to use data from the 2001-2005 NIBRS to construct an epidemiological profile of sexual assault among males. Our results suggest that the incidence of sexual assault was higher among young males (less than 19 years of age), with approximately 90% of all cases being reported among members of this age group. Among males of all ages, forcible fondling and sodomy were the most prevalent forms of sexual assault. Results from additional analyses include age- and race-specific rates of male sexual assault, the prevalence and severity of injury, and time trends detailing incidence by time of the day and location of the incident. Our analyses show that sexual assault is experienced by males of all age groups. However, the rate of sexual assault is higher among younger males. Despite some limitations, results from this study suggest that NIBRS data may provide a important complement to survey data for understanding breadth and consequences of male sexual assault.