Morgentaler v. The Queen in the Supreme Court of Canada.

In Morgentaler v. R., the Supreme Court of Canada struck down the abortion provisions in the Criminal Code. In a five to two split, a majority of the Supreme Court judges found that section 251 offended a pregnant woman's constitutionally protected right not to be deprived of her "life, liberty, and security of the person." Sheilah Martin reviews the three majority judgments and focuses on the decision written by Madame Justice Wilson. She believes that Madame Justice Wilson's opinion merits special attention in several regards: her conclusions on the constitutional rights of pregnant women; her recognition and validation of women's perspectives on abortion; and her approach to balancing women's interests in reproductive self-determination against the state's interest in regulating reproduction. Sheilah Martin concludes that this decision will reverberate far into the future. Even though it fails to establish clear guidelines concerning governmental power to control access to abortion, its principles outline the legal framework in which future litigation will occur, and it will limit and shape the terms of any ensuing political debate. In addition, Madame Justice Wilson's judgment holds great promise for those looking to the Court to promote the rights of women and other historically disadvantaged groups.     

The cutaneous ink sign: a tipoff to suicide or suicide notes

The presence of smeared or unsmeared ink on the skin resulting from the writing process has been observed in a number of suicide victims who have left suicide notes. The authors report a case of a palmar "cutaneous ink sign" and discuss its forensic science import.     

A contribution to the discussion of probabilities and human hair comparisons

The paper by Gaudette and Keeping on "An Attempt at Determining Probabilities in Human Scalp Hair Comparison" in the Journal of Forensic Sciences (Vol. 19, No. 3, July 1974, pp. 599-606) has provoked considerable controversy. This paper highlights two of the sources of the controversy and shows how the probability, 1/4500, quoted by Gaudette and Keeping should be treated with caution. The necessity of the use of a likelihood ratio statistic is described. It is suggested that the hair examination form resulting from the responses to the questionnaire recently distributed by the authors and also the discussions at Quantico (Proceedings of the International Symposium on Forensic Hair Comparisons, 25-27 June 1985, Quantico VA) should be used to facilitate the collection of the data which will be necessary to enable a likelihood ratio statistic to be estimated effectively.