Mere presence of informal guardians deters burglars: a virtual reality study

Journal of Experimental Criminology - This study investigates the deterrent effects of incremental levels of guardianship on residential burglary and assesses how burglars differ from non-burglars...     

Consensus on validation of forensic voice comparison

Since the 1960s, there have been calls for forensic voice comparison to be empirically validated under casework conditions. Since around 2000, there have been an increasing number of researchers and practitioners who conduct forensic-voice-comparison research and casework within the likelihood-ratio framework. In recent years, this community of researchers and practitioners has made substantial progress toward validation under casework conditions becoming a standard part of practice: Procedures for conducting validation have been developed, along with graphics and metrics for representing the results, and an increasing number of papers are being published that include empirical validation of forensic-voice-comparison systems under conditions reflecting casework conditions. An outstanding question, however, is: In the context of a case, given the results of an empirical validation of a forensic-voice-comparison system, how can one decide whether the system is good enough for its output to be used in court? This paper provides a statement of consensus developed in response to this question. Contributors included individuals who had knowledge and experience of validating forensic-voice-comparison systems in research and/or casework contexts, and individuals who had actually presented validation results to courts. They also included individuals who could bring a legal perspective on these matters, and individuals with knowledge and experience of validation in forensic science more broadly. We provide recommendations on what practitioners should do when conducting evaluations and validations, and what they should present to the court. Although our focus is explicitly on forensic voice comparison, we hope that this contribution will be of interest to an audience concerned with validation in forensic science more broadly. Although not written specifically for a legal audience, we hope that this contribution will still be of interest to lawyers.     

Correction to: Establishing Trust in the Illegal Wildlife Trade in China

Asian Journal of Criminology - The funding information provided at the Acknowledgement section in the original article is inaccurate.     

Supreme Court, 7 January 2000, RvdW 2000 16 C,NIPR 2000, 106.

Netherlands International Law Review -     

The Status of the Budget Constraint,Federalism and the Relative Size of Government: A Bureaucracy Approach

We develop a model along the lines of Niskanen,articulating that under a soft government budgetconstraint the full production cost of the public goodis not reflected in the tax price as perceived by theconsumer-taxpayer-voter. Various proportions ofnon-tax financing and different degrees of votermyopia with respect to discounting the future taxliabilities are taken into account. It can be shownthat both the actual level of public output and theamount of slack resources are lower under a hardbudget constraint than under a soft budget regime.Lower levels of government typically operate under ahard budget constraint when compared with the federallevel since they have only limited (public) borrowingopportunities and no access to money creation(seignorage). In a federalist setting more governmentdecisions are taken under a hard budget constraintthan in a unitary state. Hence one would expect thatthe overall size of government is relatively smallerin a structure with fiscal federalism. An empiricaltest for 19 OECD-countries (1990–1992) seems tosupport this hypothesis.     

Quantifiler observations of relevance to forensic casework

The Quantifiler (QF) kit is regularly used by forensic scientists for DNA quantitation. We performed in-house validation studies which revealed some interesting observations. The QF standard displayed a two-fold difference between two different lot numbers which suggests that every standard should be tested prior to use. The Promega K562 DNA standard works well with the QF kit. c. 41% of samples that inhibited the internal PCR control (IPC) system within the QF kit still produced good Profiler Plus reactions. QIAquick was effective at removing inhibitors. The presence of dyes within casework samples were observed not to inhibit QF amplifications. Template DNA greater than 100 ng/muL appeared to inhibit the IPC. Close to identical concentration results were obtained when alternative analysis settings were used. These validation findings will assist DNA processes involved in forensic casework.     

Development of the supernormality scale-revised and its relationship with psychopathy

Abstract:  The current research addresses the psychometric and diagnostic qualities of the Supernormality Scale-Revised (SS-R), a self-report measurement. Supernormality is defined as the tendency to systematically deny the presence of common symptoms (e.g., intrusive thoughts). In study 1, the SS-R was administered to forensic patients ( n  = 63), psychiatric patients ( n  = 26), honestly responding students ( n  = 26), and students instructed to fake supernormality ( n  = 20). Findings indicated good test–retest stability, and adequate internal consistency. Furthermore, the SS-R showed overall good predictive and convergent validity. Moreover, the diagnostic accuracy was excellent (sensitivity and specificity being 0.80 and 0.92, respectively). In study 2, 115 (healthy) controls and 32 forensic patients completed the SS-R and the Psychopathic Personality Inventory (PPI) ( J Pers Assess 1996; 66 :488), an instrument measuring psychopathy. Results showed again that the SS-R is a reliable and valid instrument. However, supernormality was not related to psychopathy as measured by the PPI.     

Regulating security on the Internet: control versus trust

ABSTRACT

This article focuses on the role of government in relation to cybersecurity. Traditionally, cybersecurity was primarily seen as a technical issue. In recent years, governments have realised that they, too, have a stake in securing the Internet. In their attempts to grapple with cybersecurity, governments often turn to technical solutions to ‘code away’ illegal or undesired behaviours. ‘Techno-regulation’ has become popular because it may seem to be an effective and cheap way of increasing control over end users’ behaviours and increasing cybersecurity. In this article, we will explain why using techno-regulation has significant downsides and, therefore, why it may be unwise to use it as a dominant regulatory strategy for securing the Internet. We argue that other regulatory strategies ought to be considered as well, most importantly: trust. The second part of this article explains that trust can be used as an implicit strategy to increase cybersecurity or as an explicit mechanism for the same goal.     

Standard Symptom Inventories for Asylum Seekers in a Psychiatric Hospital: Limited Utility Due to Poor Symptom Validity

We examined symptom validity in two samples (Ns = 27 and 35) of asylum seekers who had been admitted to a psychiatric facility. Considerable proportions over-endorsed atypical symptoms (63 and 83%, respectively) and underperformed on a simple forced-choice task requiring the identification of basic emotions (41 and 71%, respectively). Over-endorsement and underperformance were unrelated to Dutch language proficiency but were related to raised scores on standard symptom inventories commonly used to assess psychiatric symptoms of asylum seekers. This pattern of findings casts doubts on attempts to monitor symptom severity and treatment progress in psychiatric asylum seekers without taking symptom validity into account.