Zaleplon and driving impairment

Zaleplon, a sedative-hypnotic, was identified in the blood of a subject arrested for impaired driving. Symptoms reported were those of central nervous system (CNS) depression. The zaleplon concentration was determined to be 0.13 microg/mL. Symptoms included slow movements and reactions, poor coordination, and lack of balance. Although no quantitative relationship between blood concentrations and degree of driving impairment is currently possible, it is reasonable to conclude that because of its specific activity as a sedative-hypnotic, blood concentrations consistent with doses exceeding therapeutic concentrations of zaleplon have the potential to cause impairment of psychomotor function, and would impair a person's level of consciousness and driving ability.     

Uncertainty and Turnout

This article develops a model that simultaneously considersindividual turnout and vote choice while also accounting foruncertainty about candidates. The theoretical development ofthis model implies that the effects of uncertainty on turnoutvary with the strength of individual preferences. Applicationof the model to individual choice in the 1996 American presidentialelection confirms that decreasing uncertainty about the charactertraits of the candidates decreases the probability of abstentionfor individuals with strong preferences but increases the probabilityof abstention for individuals with weak preferences.     

The Effect of Jury Deliberations on Jurors' Reasoning Skills

The effect of jury deliberation on jurors' reasoning skill in a murder trial was examined. Specifically, the effect of deliberating on reasoning competence (as defined by Kuhn, Weinstock and Flaton, 1994) was explored. One hundred and four participants viewed a videotaped murder trial and either deliberated in 12-person juries or ruminated on the case individually. Among those assigned to juries, half had their reasoning skill assessed prior to deliberations, while the others were tested after deliberating. Jurors in the individual rumination condition were assessed after they had the opportunity to reflect on the case alone. As hypothesized, post-group-deliberation jurors were more likely to discount both the selected verdict and alternative theories and incorporate judgmental supporting statements than were the other mock jurors. However, the mock jurors did not differ with regard to making statements that supported alternative verdicts or including judgmental statements that discounted their chosen verdict. In terms of Kuhn's reasoning continuum from satisficing (low level) to theory–evidence coordination (high level), there is some evidence that post-group-deliberation jurors may be closer to the high end than predeliberation jurors or post-individual-rumination jurors in some aspects of the task, but not in others.     

Use of subpopulation data in Australian forensic DNA casework

DNA profiling evidence presented in court should be accompanied by a reliable estimate of its evidential weight. In calculating such statistics, allele frequencies from commonly employed autosomal microsatellite loci are required. These allele frequencies should be collected at a level that appropriately represents the genetic diversity that exists in the population. Typically this occurs at broadly defined bio-geographic categories, such as Caucasian or Asian. Datasets are commonly administered at the jurisdictional level. This paper focuses on Australian jurisdictions and assesses whether this current practice is appropriate for Aboriginal Australian and Caucasian populations alike. In keeping with other studies we observe negligible differences between Caucasian populations within Australia when segregated geographically. However segregation of Aboriginal Australian population data along contemporary State and Territory lines appears to mask the diversity that exists within this subpopulation. For this reason datasets collated along more traditional lines may be more appropriate, particularly to distinguish the most genetically differentiated populations residing in the north of the continent.     

Is a Local Government’s Decision ‘In Writing?’:The U.S. Supreme Court to Rule

Abstract

An application to place a 108‐foot‐tall cell tower in a residential neighborhood. An outpouring of opposition. A public hearing. A denial—by unanimous vote on an oral motion. And a letter to the applicant stating that the application had been denied and referring to the hearing’s minutes, which reflect reasons why the board may have denied the application. These are the key facts of T‐Mobile South, LLC v. City of Roswell, No. 13‐ 975, a case that the U.S. Supreme Court will consider this fall. The case’s central legal question is also straightforward. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 states that “ [a]ny decision . . . to deny a request . . . shall be in writing. ” The Court will decide whether it is sufficient for a city to state in writing that it has denied the application and to refer to the record, or whether the written denial must also describe the reasons for the city’s decision. The case could have significant impacts on how local zoning boards function and on the form their decisions must take to survive legal challenge. It also could lead to effects on local governments well beyond the narrow issue presented here.