Conference: Scientific Evidence in the Courts: The Sciences' Role in the Promotion of Justice

会议：法庭上的科学证据：科学在促进正义中的作用

• 批准号: 2318434
• 负责人: Theresa Harris
• 金额: $ 4.99万
• 依托单位: American Association for the Advancement of Science
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 2023
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2023-06-01 至 2024-05-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=2318434&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: Conference; Scientific; Evidence; Courts; Sciences

In 1923, the District of Columbia Court ruled that judges have a constitutional responsibility to assess the reliability of scientific and technical evidence and expert witness testimony (Frye v. United States), establishing guidelines for judges to determine what evidence and whose testimony will be presented at trial or provided to the jury for their consideration. Since this ruling, the Supreme Court of the United States and Congress have expanded upon and articulated further guidance for this gatekeeping function (the Federal Rules of Evidence, 1975; Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 1993; General Electric Co. v. Joiner, 1997; and Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, 1999). However, the applications of the Frye and Daubert Standards remain inconsistent across both federal and state courts, allowing for unreliable evidence and testimony to enter trials, increasing the likelihood of unjust outcomes, such as wrongful convictions, as well as other violations of constitutional rights. Some experts suggest that the adoption of the Daubert Standard has also constrained access to the justice system for litigants from historically marginalized populations, specifically African Americans. This conference will reflect upon the current body of research regarding the courts’ application of admissibility standards and explore the potential challenges to these standards arising from quickly developing scientific fields such as artificial intelligence, climate science, statistical modeling, and advances in forensic science. Event speakers and attendees will assess current practices and identify pathways for improving the use of credible, trustworthy scientific evidence and expert witness testimony by federal and state courts going forward.The conference in Washington, DC, will be an efficient and effective method of assembling a strategically identified and diverse group of people from across research disciplines, societal sectors, and geography, to share and discuss relevant knowledge and its impacts on society at large. The event will bring together members of both the scientific and legal communities, with government officials, academics, and representatives of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) dedicated to improving the United States justice system. The research that will be presented and discussed in the conference, and the needs for future research that will be identified, are directly related to improving the judicial system’s accurate and effective use of scientific evidence and to building public trust in the judiciary.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.

1923年，哥伦比亚特区法院裁定，法官有宪法责任评估科学技术证据和专家证人证词的可靠性（弗莱诉美国案），为法官确定哪些证据和谁的证词建立了指导方针将在审判中提出或提供给陪审团考虑。自这一裁决以来，美国最高法院和国会扩大并阐明了对这一把关职能的进一步指导（联邦证据规则，1975年; Daubert诉Merrell Dow制药公司，1993年; 1997年通用电气公司诉Joiner案; 1999年Kumho Tire公司诉卡迈克尔案）。然而，弗莱和道伯特标准在联邦和州法院的应用仍然不一致，允许不可靠的证据和证词进入审判，增加了不公正结果的可能性，如错误定罪，以及其他侵犯宪法权利的行为。一些专家认为，道伯特标准的采用也限制了历史上被边缘化的人口，特别是非裔美国人的诉讼当事人诉诸司法系统。本次会议将反思当前关于法院适用可采性标准的研究，并探讨快速发展的科学领域（如人工智能，气候科学，统计建模和法医学的进步）对这些标准的潜在挑战。活动发言人和与会者将评估当前的做法，并确定如何改善联邦和州法院未来使用可信，值得信赖的科学证据和专家证人证词的途径。在华盛顿举行的会议将是一种高效和有效的方法，汇集来自不同研究学科，社会部门和地理位置的战略确定和多样化的人群，分享和讨论相关知识及其对整个社会的影响。这次活动将汇集科学界和法律的界的成员，以及政府官员、学者和致力于改善美国司法系统的非政府组织的代表。会议上将介绍和讨论的研究，以及将确定的未来研究需求，直接关系到提高司法系统对科学证据的准确和有效利用，以及建立公众对司法机构的信任。该奖项反映了NSF的法定使命，并通过使用基金会的知识价值和更广泛的影响审查标准进行评估，被认为值得支持。