, Volume 7, Issue 2, pp 243–245 | Cite as

On the Stand. Another Episode of Neuroscience and Law Discussion From Italy

  • Michele FariscoEmail author
  • Carlo Petrini
Brief Communication


After three proceedings in which neuroscience was a relevant factor for the final verdict in Italian courts, for the first time a recent case puts in question the legal relevance of neuroscientific evidence. This decision deserves international attention in its underlining that the uncertainty still affecting neuroscientific knowledge can have a significant impact on the law. It urges the consideration of such uncertainty and the development of a shared management of it.


Neuroscience Law Neurolaw 


  1. 1.
    Burns, J.M., and R.H. Swerdlow. 2003. Right orbitofrontal tumor with pedophilia symptom and constructional apraxia sign. Archives of Neurology 60(3): 437–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jawad, S., C. Sidebothams, R. Sequira, and N. Jamil. 2009. Altered sexual orientation following dominant hemisphere infarct. The Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences 21(3): 353–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Farisco, M., and C. Petrini. 2012. The impact of neuroscience and genetics on the law: A recent Italian case. Neuroethics 5(3): 317–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Appelbaum, P.S. 2005. Behavioral genetics and the punishment of crime. Law & Psychiatry 56: 25–27.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Green, J., and J. Cohen. 2004. For the law, neuroscience changes nothing and everything. Philosophical Transaction of the Royal Society of London Series B, Biological Sciences 359(1451): 1775–1785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mobbs, D., H.C. Lau, O.D. Jones, and C.D. Frith. 2007. Law, responsibility, and the brain. PLoS Biology 5(4): e103. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0050103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Vincent, N.O. 2010. On the relevance of neuroscience to criminal responsibility. Criminal Law and Philosophy 4: 77–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Freeman, M. (ed.). 2011. Law and neuroscience: Current legal issues Volume 13. Oxford: Oxford Scholarship. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199599844.001.0001.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Spranger, T.M. (ed.). 2012. International Neurolaw. A comparative analysis. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Biogem Genetic Research CentreVia Camporeale—Area PIPAriano IrpinoItaly
  2. 2.Italian National Institute of HealthRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations