Evaluating the accuracy and precision of cranial morphological traits for sex determination

Sex determination is a key analysis that forensic anthropologists perform in order to construct a biological profile of human remains. The techniques used in forensic investigations must meet the Mohan or Daubert criteria, for admissibility in a court of law. In this study, the precision and accuracy of 21 morphological characteristics of the skull were tested on a modern sample of 50 adult crania of European White ancestry. The following craniofacial features are identified as high-quality traits, defined by intraobserver error or=80%: mastoid size, supraorbital ridge size, general size and architecture, rugosity of the zygomatic extension, size and shape of the nasal aperture, and gonial angle. Ninety-six percent accuracy and 92% precision were achieved using 20 traits in combination. Fisher's exact probability tests revealed no significant differences (p=0.05) in the levels of precision or accuracy between age categories. Sex-related bias in accuracy was found for the following cranial features: ramus symphysis (p=0.009), zygomatic extension (p=0.0016), and occipital markings (p=0.0013). These traits demonstrated a greater tendency to be scored male than female.     

Adults’ Judgments of Children's Coached Reports

This study investigated adults’ judgments of the honesty of children's coached true and fabricated mock testimony. Adults saw video clips of children testifying in a mock court about a true or fabricated event in their lives. They were asked to make an assessment of the truthfulness of the testimony, and respond to questions about their perception of children's credibility. Half of the adults saw children testifying after a competence examination, and the other half saw children testifying without a competence examination. Overall, girls were rated as more competent than boys, and their testimony was more likely to be believed. Younger children were more likely to be rated as incompetent than older children. A factor analysis of adults’ responses revealed six factors which significantly predicted adults’ overall assessment of children's credibility, and their evaluations of children's competence to testify. Adults’ detection accuracy was at chance, with the majority of children rated as truthful. Viewing the competency examination and cross-examination did not improve the adults’ detection accuracy. However, seeing the cross-examination made adults’ less likely to believe children's testimony. The implications of these results for the judicial system are discussed.     

专家、利益集团与公共参与

公共参与制度在行政决策中方兴未艾,而专家咨询机制也愈显重要。在公共参与背景下,公众与专家的角色定位及功能作用亟需反思。纷繁复杂的公共参与理论基础直接影响到专家咨询制度的定位、功能与运行。美国专家咨询制度的经验和教训,为完善我国专家咨询制度提供了借鉴。法治化、型式化、竞争化、公开化是完善我国专家咨询制度的应有取向。     

证人保护与被告人权利保障

刑事诉讼法修正案草案规定了更加完善的证人保护制度,但证人保护与被告人知悉权、对质权可能发生冲突,各国为此采取了不同的措施予以平衡,包括限制披露证人身份信息和采用视频技术或设置屏障的方式出庭作证等。刑事诉讼法修正案草案有必要在平衡证人保护与被告人权利保障的基础上完善证人保护制度。     

Reflections on the 65~(th) Annual UN DPI/NGO Conference

正August 27-29,as a member of the Chinese NGO Delegation,I took part in the 65thAnnual UN DPI/NGO Conference held in UN headquarters in New York.The theme of this conference was "2015 and Beyond:Our Action Agenda".2015 will be the final year of UN Millennium Development Goal(MDG)and witness the 70 anniversary of UN.This     

Peer‐Reviewed Forensic Consultation in Practice: Multidisciplinary Oversight in Common Expertise

The fallibility of forensic science consultation is an ongoing and major justice concern. Prospective peer‐reviewed forensic consultation has over 10 years of application in American criminal and civil courts, adapting from the traditional oversight of teaching hospitals, rules of evidence and discovery, conventions of testimony of expert witnesses, and attorneys' overall trial strategy. In systematizing heightened oversight, this process ensures greater accountability in forensic science consultation. The integration of peer reviewers' complementary expertise and experience enhances the sophistication and overall quality of assessment. Forensic examination frequently involves the interface of different specialties. Multidisciplinary peer review augments expert proficiency with that of professional peers having different vantage points from relevant scientific disciplines. This approach ensures greater sophistication of a case inquiry, built‐in accountability, and streamlined processes when multiple experts are necessitated. Here, the authors present examples of several cases and the primary and secondary benefits of this collaborative, rigorous, cross‐disciplinary exercise.     

Driving Under the Influence of Synthetic Cannabinoid Receptor Agonist XLR‐11

The case of a 22‐year‐old male Caucasian driver is presented. He was involved in a traffic collision. At the roadside, he displayed blank stare and mellow speech with a barely audible voice. A DRE found low body temperature, rigid muscle tone, normal pulse, lack of horizontal and vertical gaze nystagmus, nonconvergence of the eyes, dilated pupil size, and normal Pupillary reaction to light. A standard toxicology DUID protocol was performed on the driver's whole blood including ELISA and GC‐MS drug screens with negative results. Additional drug screening was undertaken for bath salts and synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists by LC‐MS/MS by a commercial laboratory and identified the synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonist XLR‐11 in the driver's blood. XLR‐11 was subsequently quantified at 1.34 ng/mL. This is the first documented case involving a driver operating a motor vehicle under the influence of the synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonist XLR‐11.     

Development of an instrument for assessing the quality of forensic evidence and expert testimony from three feature-comparison methods: DNA,voice, and fingerprint analysis

In a context of rising violence and long-lasting impunity, in 2008, Mexico's criminal justice system underwent a radical change from an inquisitorial model to an adversarial one, to make it more effective, transparent, and expeditious. The new system tasked judges with publicly determining the admissibility of forensic evidence, as well as assessing its technical quality and probative value—tasks for which they currently receive little to no training. With the aim of contributing to the consolidation of the adversarial model, a comparative framework—in the form of a checklist—of the analysis of fingerprints, DNA samples, and voice recordings was created. To do so, a review of the academic literature, published reports, and guidelines was performed. The collected data were synthesized and submitted to a panel of Mexican judges, who provided feedback on its adequacy. The framework focuses on the steps on which quality assurance of forensic evidence depends, organized in five discrete stages that span from the collection of samples at the scene of a crime to the presentation of evidence at trial, specifying the main technical criteria experts should state to allow a decision maker to examine its accuracy and reliability. Differences and commonalities among the three methods were identified, particularly in terms of how qualitative and quantitative analyses are performed in each. Besides its potential usefulness as an aid for judicial decision-making, the checklist could be a valuable resource for training programs aimed at judges, as well as quality assurance programs.     

The spatial determinants of the prevalence of anti-elite rhetoric across parties

Abstract

The article investigates whether there are specific spatial conditions that make a party more likely to pay closer attention to anti-elite rhetoric than to alternative issues in its political confrontation with other parties. The article first treats anti-elitism as a non-policy vote-winning strategy that could be valued positively by a broad class of voters across ideological lines (its ‘quasi-valence’ attribute). It is then shown that the incentive of a party to embrace such a strategy grows as the ideological space separating that party from the other(s) shrinks. This hypothesis receives empirical support from the 2014 Chapel Hill Expert Survey Data.     

Resistant to Change? The European Commission and Expert Group Reform

This article examines how the European Commission has responded to external criticism and demands for the democratisation and reform of the way it uses expert groups in EU policy making. The article analyses the nature and character of the Commission’s dialogue with its critics and the degree and extent to which it was prepared to adapt its existing internal processes and procedures to the reform agenda. Recent theories inform us that organisations respond in different ways to external criticism and demands for reform, including full adaptation, evasion, institutional decoupling and reinterpretation. The main findings suggest that the Commission was not completely resistant to changing its approach to the use of expertise. The Commission reinterpreted its critics’ demands by introducing reforms that defused this external pressure, while protecting the effectiveness of its existing internal ideology and processes. These findings serve to enhance the Commission’s image as an increasingly normalised bureaucracy and reinforce the importance of knowledge and expertise as a key source of Commission legitimacy.