Will the Brain Ever Take the Stand? Canadian Law and the Admissibility of Neurotechnology Lie Detection Evidence

Jocelyn Downie; Matthew R Kutcher; Victoria Apold

Will the Brain Ever Take the Stand? Canadian Law and the Admissibility of Neurotechnology Lie Detection Evidence

Jocelyn Downie, Matthew R Kutcher, Victoria Apold

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

This article is organized into four sections. The first section provides arguments to support the claim that an encounter between Canadian courts and Neurotechnology Lie Detection Evidence (NTLD) appears imminent; to this end, examples of increasing awareness of NTLD are discussed along with evidence of the introduction of related neurotechnologies in Canadian and U.S. courts.

Original language	Canadian English
Journal	Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press
Publication status	Published - Jan. 1 2010

Keywords

United States
Lie Detection
Neurotechnology
Neuroscience
Admissibility

Disciplines

Comparative and Foreign Law
Courts
Criminal Law
Criminal Procedure
Evidence
Judges
Law
Science and Technology Law

Access to Document

https://dal.novanet.ca/permalink/01NOVA_DAL/ev10a8/cdi_proquest_reports_506538639

Cite this

@article{72eb2092d4aa423cb7b37ff0c086075e,

title = "Will the Brain Ever Take the Stand? Canadian Law and the Admissibility of Neurotechnology Lie Detection Evidence",

abstract = " This article is organized into four sections. The first section provides arguments to support the claim that an encounter between Canadian courts and Neurotechnology Lie Detection Evidence (NTLD) appears imminent; to this end, examples of increasing awareness of NTLD are discussed along with evidence of the introduction of related neurotechnologies in Canadian and U.S. courts.",

keywords = "United States, Lie Detection, Neurotechnology, Neuroscience, Admissibility",

author = "Jocelyn Downie and Kutcher, {Matthew R} and Victoria Apold",

note = "Matthew Kutcher, Victoria Apold, & Jocelyn Downie, {"}Will the Brain Ever Take the Stand? Canadian Law and the Admissibility of Neurotechnology Lie Detection Evidence{"} (2010) 56:1-2 Crim LQ 135.",

year = "2010",

month = jan,

day = "1",

language = "Canadian English",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Will the Brain Ever Take the Stand? Canadian Law and the Admissibility of Neurotechnology Lie Detection Evidence

AU - Downie, Jocelyn

AU - Kutcher, Matthew R

AU - Apold, Victoria

N1 - Matthew Kutcher, Victoria Apold, & Jocelyn Downie, "Will the Brain Ever Take the Stand? Canadian Law and the Admissibility of Neurotechnology Lie Detection Evidence" (2010) 56:1-2 Crim LQ 135.

PY - 2010/1/1

Y1 - 2010/1/1

N2 - This article is organized into four sections. The first section provides arguments to support the claim that an encounter between Canadian courts and Neurotechnology Lie Detection Evidence (NTLD) appears imminent; to this end, examples of increasing awareness of NTLD are discussed along with evidence of the introduction of related neurotechnologies in Canadian and U.S. courts.

AB - This article is organized into four sections. The first section provides arguments to support the claim that an encounter between Canadian courts and Neurotechnology Lie Detection Evidence (NTLD) appears imminent; to this end, examples of increasing awareness of NTLD are discussed along with evidence of the introduction of related neurotechnologies in Canadian and U.S. courts.

KW - United States

KW - Lie Detection

KW - Neurotechnology

KW - Neuroscience

KW - Admissibility

UR - https://digitalcommons.schulichlaw.dal.ca/scholarly_works/1774

UR - https://dal.novanet.ca/permalink/01NOVA_DAL/ev10a8/cdi_proquest_reports_506538639

M3 - Article

JO - Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

JF - Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

ER -

Will the Brain Ever Take the Stand? Canadian Law and the Admissibility of Neurotechnology Lie Detection Evidence

Abstract

Keywords

Disciplines

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this