Developmental validation of a novel lateral flow strip test for rapid identification of human blood (Rapid Stain Identification™-Blood)

Human blood is the body fluid most commonly encountered at crime scenes, and blood detection may aid investigators in reconstructing what occurred during a crime. In addition, blood detection can help determine which items of evidence should be processed for DNA-STR testing. Unfortunately, many common substances can cause red-brown stains that resemble blood. Furthermore, many current human blood detection methods are presumptive and prone to false positive results. Here, the developmental validation of a new blood identification test, Rapid Stain Identification™-Blood (RSID™-Blood), is described. RSID™-Blood utilizes two anti-glycophorin A (red blood cell membrane specific protein) monoclonal antibodies in a lateral flow strip test format to detect human blood. We present evidence demonstrating that this test is accurate, reproducible, easy to use, and highly specific for human blood. Importantly, RSID™-Blood does not cross-react with ferret, skunk, or primate blood and exhibits no high-dose hook effect. Also, we describe studies on the sensitivity, body fluid specificity, and species specificity of RSID™-Blood. In addition, we show that the test can detect blood from a variety of forensic exhibits prior to processing for DNA-STR analysis. In conclusion, we suggest that RSID™-Blood is effective and useful for the detection of human blood on forensic exhibits, and offers improved blood detection when compared to other currently used methods.     

Accountability and America's Secret Foreign Policy: Keeping a Legislative Eye on the Central Intelligence Agency

Intelligence accountability ("oversight") encompasses the supervision of a vast range of secret activities and 15 major agencies. Oversight since 1975 has been robust compared to earlier years; yet it continues to fall short of goals espoused by the Church Committee that year, as well as by subsequent panels advocating intelligence reform. Lawmakers have responded responsibly to intelligence surprises ("fire alarms"), carrying out probes into domestic spying, assassination plots, and other questionable covert actions, counterintelligence vulnerabilities, and major intelligence failures. They have paid less attention, though, to the day-to-day "police-patrolling" that might uncover weaknesses and eliminate the need for emergency firefighting. Individual members in both branches of Congress have displayed a significant commitment to oversight activities, and now and then the full oversight committees have worked energetically as a unit. Mostly, however, intelligence accountability since 1975 has been a story of discontinuous motivation, ad hoc responses to scandals, and reliance on the initiative of just a few members of Congress—mainly the occasional dedicated committee chair—to carry the burden. Despite the recommendations of several scholarly studies and government reports, absent still is a comprehensive approach to intelligence review that mobilizes most, if not all, of the members of the House and Senate standing committees on intelligence toward a systematic plan of police-patrolling, without waiting for fire alarms.     

The allusive market: insurance of flood risk in neoliberal Britain

Launched in 2016, Flood Re is a government-supported scheme for flood-risk insurance in Britain that is intended to pave the way towards an eventual ‘free’ market featuring risk-reflective pricing. This paper introduces the concept of ‘the allusive market’ to denote the figurative work that the market vision performs in this context. Alluding to the merits of what is in reality a highly implausible market-based future for flood insurance releases the government from having to substantively address intractable problems associated with the financial risk of flooding in the present: the market will come to the rescue. A risk-management crutch, the allusive market engenders contemporary policy paralysis, occasioning in turn the worsening of the very problems that the market is being relied upon, eventually, to resolve.     

Using Social Science to Inform the Law of Intestacy: The Case of Unmarried Committed Partners

Laws of intestate succession determine how the estate of a person who dies without a will is distributed. Researchers have struggled with the question of how to infer the donative intent of persons who die intestate. Based on an empirical study of unmarried committed partners, we compare the usefulness of two methods of social research for informing intestacy law: will studies and interviews with living persons about their preferences for estate distribution. The results indicate that for some groups of unmarried committed partners, will studies may not adequately reflect the extent to which intestate decedents wish their partner to share in their estate. In addition, the results demonstrate a close correspondence between respondents' actual wills, when they had them, and their distributive preferences on hypothetical scenarios. These findings are discussed as they relate to an examination of which sources of social scientific evidence are most useful in informing the law of intestacy.     

Taking Capital Punishment Seriously

Although Asia is the most important region of the world when it comes to capital punishment, it is also one of the most understudied. This article identifies four research questions that deserve attention from students and scholars who believe taking capital punishment seriously requires studying Asia seriously too. What are the empirical contours of capital punishment in contemporary Asia? What are the histories of capital punishment in Asia? Can Western theories of capital punishment explain patterns and changes in Asia? And what is the future of capital punishment in Asia? If researchers take the trouble to explore these questions, the death penalty will not only become an interesting window into law and society in Asia, but Asia will prove to be an instructive window into the death penalty—the gravest real-life problem in the law.     

Felony voir dire

The practice of voir dire has a venerable history in the United States. However, despite numerous historical and legal discussions of the topic, and the increased participation of social scientists in the process, few empirical studies have been conducted on what actually occurs during voir dire. The lack of normative data is especially troublesome in the face of recent attacks on the process itself and numerous proposals to drastically limit or even prohibit what many regard as an important criminal justice safeguard—attorney-conducted voir dire in felony trials. This exploratory study attempts to provide some insight into the nature and content of felony voir dire. Our results—based on direct observation as well as juror interview responses—suggest that much of the criticism and calls for drastic reform may be misplaced.