Investigation of the Inquisitorial and Adversarial Legal Modes of Adjudication on Scientific/Technological Testimony

科学技术证言裁判的询问式和对抗式法律模式探讨

• 批准号: 9514243
• 负责人: Joel Cooper
• 金额: $ 8.25万
• 依托单位: Princeton University
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 1996
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 1996-02-01 至 1997-10-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=9514243&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: Investigation; Inquisitorial; Adversarial; Legal; Modes

The accurate perception of scientific and technological testimony in courts of law is often crucial to protect the interests of individuals and corporations. In the civil justice system, significant monetary decisions hinge upon jurors or judges accurately perceiving the S/T testimony of scientists and engineers. Technological and scientific innovations that are supported by reliable S/T data may not be fairly adjudicated if those data are not processed accurately by the judge or jurors making the decision. In previous work in our laboratory, some of the difficulties jurors have processing complex S/T testimony in civil liability cases were examined. In this study, we will examine the locus of the investigator role in the adversarial and inquisitorial systems. We hypothesize that participants who adopt the inquisitorial role of investigator for the court will gain a more accurate and complete understanding of the S/T evidence than will participants who are asked to take the adversarial position. Moreover, it is hypothesized that inquisitorial participants will bring a more representative distribution of evidence to the attention of decision makers than will the combination of the defense and plaintiff advocates in the adversarial system. In our society, the legal system is where many decisions that affect the implementation of science and technology arise. The current proposal seeks to provide information on the impact of important elements of the current adversarial system on the accurate perception of S/T evidence in civil proceedings.

在法庭上对科学和技术证词的准确理解往往对保护个人和公司的利益至关重要。 在民事司法系统中，重要的金钱决定取决于陪审员或法官准确地理解科学家和工程师的科技证词。 如果法官或陪审员在作出裁决时没有准确地处理这些数据，那么有可靠的科技数据支持的技术和科学创新就可能得不到公正的裁决。 在我们实验室以前的工作中，研究了民事责任案件中陪审员处理复杂的S/T证词的一些困难。 在这项研究中，我们将研究调查员的角色在对抗和审问系统的轨迹。 我们假设，参与者谁采取审问式的调查员的角色，为法院将获得更准确和完整的理解的S/T证据比将参与者被要求采取对抗性的立场。 此外，据推测，审问式的参与者将带来一个更具代表性的证据分配决策者的注意比将在对抗制的辩护律师和原告的组合。 在我们的社会中，法律的系统是许多影响科学和技术实施的决定产生的地方。 目前的建议旨在提供资料，说明现行对抗制的重要因素对准确理解民事诉讼中的科技证据的影响。