Understanding deliberate indifference to suicide in corrections facilities: A review of recent legal cases

The US corrections system is the largest provider of mental health care in the country. Suicide is a leading cause of death in corrections facilities with rates of inmate suicide being far higher than the national average. Suicide is an event that can lead to legal action against the facility, staff, and treating health-care providers. Some claims are based on medical malpractice. In this setting, claims may also be brought based on violations of the detainee's constitutional rights. Pretrial detainees and prisoners, alike, have a constitutional right to adequate medical and psychiatric care through the Fourteenth Amendment and Eighth Amendment, respectively. But, there is limited information on constitutional claims made against correctional health-care providers for cases of inmate suicide. To help bridge this gap, the authors conducted a search of federal legal case decisions involving claims against health-care providers for deliberate indifference to a detainee's serious illness or injury in the event of attempted suicide or death by suicide over a 5 year period from 2016 to 2021. Fifteen cases were identified. Five themes emerged from the cases, which could serve as bases for claims against health-care professionals: receiving screening, mental health assessment, treatment, documentation, and attention to facility policies. The cases and their clinical significance are summarized in this article. The materials provide an overview of the problems surrounding correctional suicides and can serve as practice pointers in the corporeal setting.     

Decoding hidden darknet networks: What we learned about the illicit fentanyl trade on AlphaBay

The opioid epidemic, impacted from the proliferation of fentanyl, has added impetus to the need to detect fentanyl, sources of fentanyl, and places where fentanyl and drugs adulterated with fentanyl are available. Many darknet marketplaces (DNMs) have rules that ban fentanyl. However, it is unclear how these affect the fentanyl market. Using the AlphaBay DNM as a case study, we conducted mixed methods qualitative research. We scraped and analyzed data from the AlphaBay I2P website using, among other methods, content and social network analysis, to uncover hidden fentanyl networks. Our research highlights the next evolution of darknet marketplaces – the migration of DNMs from Tor to I2P and the methods that can be used identify fentanyl networks, irrespective of where sites are: I2P, Tor, or multihomed on I2P and Tor. Despite its ban in the Global AlphaBay Rules, our research revealed the sale of fentanyl on the AlphaBay DNM. Unlike previous studies, our findings predominantly revealed the covert sale of fentanyl on AlphaBay and predatory vendors selling illicit drugs, which unbeknownst to buyers, contained fentanyl. To a lesser extent, our findings identified the overt sale of fentanyl patches on AlphaBay. Although we examined only one DNM, the prevalence of the covert sale of fentanyl and the presence of predatory vendors underscores the importance of research that decodes the language of vendors who surreptitiously sell fentanyl or drugs adulterated with fentanyl or other illicit substances. The results of our research can inform strategies aimed at disrupting and dismantling DNM fentanyl networks.     

The over-citation of Daubert in forensic anthropology

The 1993 US Supreme Court decision Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. presented new guidance for the judicial assessment of expert witness evidence and testimony in the determination of admissibility. Despite the rarity of admissibility challenges to forensic anthropology evidence, Daubert is frequently cited in published forensic anthropology research. This study undertook a qualitative thematic analysis of forensic anthropology articles published in the Journal of Forensic Sciences to assess why authors continue to cite Daubert and express concerns over potential exclusion. The results show a significant increase in the number of articles that cite legal admissibility standards over time (p < 0.001). Authors frequently cite these standards to contextualize their results within the Daubert framework or to justify the need for their research. Notably, many articles present Daubert as a constraining force, misinterpreting the guidelines as rigid criteria or that they require methods to be strictly quantitative. However, Daubert was intended to be a flexible tool for judges—not a standard or instruction for scientists. While it was reasonable to reflect on the scientific rigor of methods in the wake of the Daubert decision, a new perspective is warranted in which forensic anthropologists shift their focus from trying to “satisfy” admissibility guidelines to adopting quality assurance measures that minimize error and ensure confidence in analytical results, and developing and using methods that are grounded in good science—which is important regardless of whether or not the results are ever the subject of a trial.     

The origins of quare impedit

The writ of quare impedit was, until the mid-nineteenth century, a standard real action for the recovery of advowsons. This article argues that the writ was most likely created between 1187 and 1196, and that it was, at least in part, a response to pressure from religious houses that acquired advowsons by charter of gift and were precluded from bringing the writ of right of advowson or the assize of darrein presentment.     

Uncertainty in probabilistic genotyping of low template DNA: A case study comparing STRMix™ and TrueAllele™

Two probabilistic genotyping (PG) programs, STRMix™ and TrueAllele™, were used to assess the strength of the same item of DNA evidence in a federal criminal case, with strikingly different results. For STRMix, the reported likelihood ratio in favor of the non-contributor hypothesis was 24; for TrueAllele it ranged from 1.2 million to 16.7 million, depending on the reference population. This case report seeks to explain why the two programs produced different results and to consider what the difference tells us about the reliability and trustworthiness of these programs. It uses a locus-by-locus breakdown to trace the differing results to subtle differences in modeling parameters and methods, analytic thresholds, and mixture ratios, as well as TrueAllele's use of an ad hoc procedure for assigning LRs at some loci. These findings illustrate the extent to which PG analysis rests on a lattice of contestable assumptions, highlighting the importance of rigorous validation of PG programs using known-source test samples that closely replicate the characteristics of evidentiary samples. The article also points out misleading aspects of the way STRMix and TrueAllele results are routinely presented in reports and testimony and calls for clarification of forensic reporting standards to address those problems.     

Enterprise Liability: Justifying Vicarious Liability

In Lister v Hesley Hall [2002] 1 AC 215 the House of Lords reformedthe law on vicarious liability, in the context of a claim arisingover the intentional infliction of harm, by introducing the‘close connection’ test. The immediate catalystwas the desire to facilitate recovery of damages on the partof victims of child abuse. The precise form the revision assumedwas derived from two Canadian Supreme Court cases: Bazley vCurry [1999] 174 DLR (4th) 45 and Jacobi v Griffiths [1999]174 DLR (4th) 7. The Canadian jurisprudence contains a detailedreview of the policy factors underpinning the law of vicariousliability and expresses the view that the most significant ofthese is ‘enterprise liability’. This article attemptsto establish whether enterprise liability holds the same significancein the UK. And, on the assumption that it does, the articlegoes on to consider any difficulties that may ensue and anyfurther common law reforms that may result. In particular itconsiders whether the law on vicarious liability for independentcontractors is likely to change.     

Global Warming: Will There Be Exposure for Directors and Officers and Will It Be Covered?

This article will explore the potential legal liabilities of corporate officers and directors due to the effects of global warming on the business of their corporation, as well as the insurance coverage issues likely to arise under directors' and officers' (D&O) liability policies in light of those liabilities. The article focuses particularly on the pollution exclusion and the bodily injury and property damage exclusions, and also explores scenarios that may engender attempts by insurers to rescind the policy.