# kb

id: what-if-book-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_If-1.md
category: reference
title: What If? (book)
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_If?_(book)
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:01.686050+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: what-if-book-20260505-0
summary:
What would happen if you tried to hit a baseball pitched at 90% the speed of light? Using mathematics and physics, Munroe concluded such a situation would result in a nuclear fusion explosion, and that ultimately, the result would be a ruling of hit by pitch. What If? approaches its subject matter with a sense of wit and sometimes makes use of approximations to answer questions that seem impossible to solve. Most questions demand assumptions and cross-disciplinary science skills to answer, resulting in "back-of-the-envelope" calculations. What If? is interspersed with "charmingly-amateur" stick figure illustrations. The book also features periodic sections titled "Weird (and Worrying) Questions from the What If? Inbox", which are short collections of questions Munroe had not answered because he did not "want to think about that". In an interview, Munroe stated that he "never got past the initial mental image" of the question "How cold would your teeth have to get in order for a cup of hot coffee to make them shatter on contact?" == Reception == The book was received positively by critics. Ethan Gilsdorf of the Boston Globe stated that "it's fun to watch as Munroe tackles each question and examines every possible complication."


id: what-if-2-book-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_If-0.md
category: reference
title: What If? 2 (book)
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_If?_2_(book)
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:02.939398+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: what-if-2-book-20260505-0
summary:
What If? 2: Additional Serious Scientific Answers to Absurd Hypothetical Questions is a 2022 non-fiction book by Randall Munroe. The book seeks to provide scientific answers to hypothetical questions proposed by readers of the author's webcomic, xkcd, and blog, What If? A follow-up to Munroe's 2014 title What If?, the book was released on September 13, 2022, to generally positive reviews, with Time saying, "Science isn't easy, but in Munroe's capable hands, it surely can be fun." == Background == Munroe, whose career began as a roboticist for NASA, began writing his webcomic xkcd in 2005, and following its success took up cartooning full-time soon after. With many of his drawings revolving around the topics of science and mathematics, Munroe soon began receiving questions from readers about those subject areas. As a result, he created a spinoff blog titled What If? where he compiled these questions and his subsequent responses. The blog formed the basis for his 2014 book What If?, which reached the top of The New York Times Best Seller list, and inspired the creation of a second volume, What If? 2. == Synopsis == What If? 2 continues in the same vein as its predecessor in attempting


id: f-d-c-willard-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F._D._C._Willard-0.md
category: reference
title: F. D. C. Willard
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F._D._C._Willard
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:04.093310+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: f-d-c-willard-20260505-0
summary:
F. D. C. Willard (1968–1982) was the pen name of Chester, a Siamese cat, used on several papers written by his owner, J. H. Hetherington, in physics journals. On one occasion, he was listed as the sole author. == Background == In 1975, the American physicist and mathematician Jack H. Hetherington of Michigan State University wanted to publish some of his research results in the field of low-temperature physics in the scientific journal Physical Review Letters. A colleague, to whom he had given his paper for review, pointed out that Hetherington had used the first person plural, "we", in his text, and that the journal would reject this form on submissions with a sole author. Rather than take the time to retype the article to use the singular form, or to bring in a co-author, Hetherington decided to invent one. == Publications == Hetherington had a Siamese cat named Chester, who had been sired by a Siamese named Willard. Fearing that colleagues might recognize his pet's name, he thought it better to use the pet's initial. Aware that most Americans have at least two given names, he invented two more given names based on the scientific name for a house


id: albany-law-journal-of-science-and-technology-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albany_Law_Journal_of_Science_and_Technology-0.md
category: reference
title: Albany Law Journal of Science and Technology
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albany_Law_Journal_of_Science_and_Technology
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:05.669688+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: albany-law-journal-of-science-and-technology-20260505-0
summary:
The Albany Law Journal of Science and Technology (Bluebook abbreviation: Alb. L.J. Sci. & Tech.) is a triannual law journal edited by students at Albany Law School. It was established in 1990 and covers legal issues involving science and technology. The journal also organizes an annual symposia. == Membership == Members are students at Albany Law School. Students become eligible for journal membership upon completion of their first year of law school. Offers of membership are extended based on student class standing or on the results of a writing competition jointly administered by the school's three student-edited journals. == Notable symposia == Facebook Firing: The Intersection of Social Media, Employment, & Ethics (2013) Building a High-Tech, 21st Century Economy (2015) == Past Editors-in-Chief == Vol. 36 - John Rainey (2026) Vol. 35 - Savannah Everson (2025) Vol. 34 - Natalie Turney (2024) Vol. 33 - Claire Stratton (2023) Vol. 32 - Anneliese Aliasso (2022) Vol. 29 - Daniel Young (2019) Vol. 27 - Erin Ginty (2017) Vol. 26 - James Faucher II (2016) Vol. 25 - Gary J. Repke, Jr. (2015) Vol. 24 - Elizabeth A. Cappillino (2014) Vol. 23 - Nadia Isobel Arginteanu (2013) Vol. 22 - Christina M.


id: biological-patent-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_patent-0.md
category: reference
title: Biological patent
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_patent
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:06.993445+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: biological-patent-20260505-0
summary:
A biological patent is a patent on an invention in the field of biology that by law allows the patent holder to exclude others from making, using, selling, or importing the protected invention for a limited period of time. The scope and reach of biological patents vary among jurisdictions, and may include biological technology and products, genetically modified organisms and genetic material. The applicability of patents to substances and processes wholly or partially natural in origin is a subject of debate. == Biological patents in different jurisdictions == === Australia === In February 2013, Judge Justice John Nicholas ruled in the Federal Court of Australia in favour of a Myriad Genetics patent on the BRCA1 gene. This was a landmark ruling, affirming the validity of patents on naturally occurring DNA sequences. However, the U.S. Supreme Court came to the opposite conclusion only a few months later. The Australian ruling has been appealed to the Full Bench of the Federal Court; submissions in the case include consideration of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling. This decision was decided in 2014, affirming Nicholas J's decision in favor of Myriad, confirming that isolated genetic material (genes) are valid subjects of patents. In October 2015,


id: biological-patent-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_patent-1.md
category: reference
title: Biological patent
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_patent
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:06.993445+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: biological-patent-20260505-0
summary:
In the United States, up until 2013 natural biological substances themselves could have been patented (apart from any associated process or usage) if they were sufficiently "isolated" from their naturally occurring states. Prominent historical examples of such patents include those on adrenaline, insulin, vitamin B12, and various genes. A landmark ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in June 2013 declared naturally occurring DNA sequences ineligible for patents. == Ethics == === Patenting genes === Gene patents are a form of intellectual property which provide the patent holder with the exclusive right to exclude others from making, using, selling, or importing the invention for a specified period of time, typically twenty years. The patenting of genes is a controversial issue in terms of bioethics. Some believe it is unethical to patent genetic material because it treats life as a commodity, or that it undermines the dignity of people and animals by allowing ownership of genes. Some say that living materials occur naturally, and therefore cannot be patented. Along with concerns about the commodification of human life, the medical community has also warned that gene patents can inhibit the practice of medicine and progress of science. For example, the American Medical Association's


id: biological-patent-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_patent-2.md
category: reference
title: Biological patent
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_patent
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:06.993445+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: biological-patent-20260505-0
summary:
=== Patents relating to the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of COVID-19 === In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, several companies around the world raced to develop testing, vaccines, and cures for COVID-19. This required a substantial investment of time and money, and patents were used to protect this innovation. Patent holders are able to refuse licensing for third-parties to manufacture the patented medicine, creating a monopoly for the patent holder and lower supply levels. Furthermore, patent-holders control pricing for licensing and access. This patent-regime has the potential to limit access to life-saving vaccines and cures, especially for those in poor countries. Pharmaceutical industry executives diminished the idea of sharing intellectual property, arguing that companies would have no incentive to innovate if their patents were considered worthless during a pandemic. However, health advocates argue that taxpayers substantially contributed to the development of the vaccines and they should thus be regarded as global public goods. A lack of access to medication and vaccines is especially problematic during a global pandemic. In April 2020, the Director General of the World Health Organization supported a proposal by Carlos Alvarado, to create a pool of rights for testing medicine and vaccine with free access or


id: buck-v-bell-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck_v._Bell-0.md
category: reference
title: Buck v. Bell
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck_v._Bell
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:08.352062+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: buck-v-bell-20260505-0
summary:
Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927), is a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court, written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., in which the Court ruled that a state statute permitting compulsory sterilization of the unfit, including the intellectually disabled, "for the protection and health of the state" did not violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Despite changing attitudes about sterilization, the Supreme Court has never expressly overturned Buck v. Bell. It is widely believed to have been weakened by Skinner v. Oklahoma, 316 U.S. 535 (1942), which deemed compulsory sterilization of male habitual criminals unconstitutional. Legal scholar and Holmes biographer G. Edward White, in fact, wrote, "the Supreme Court has distinguished the case [Buck v. Bell] out of existence". In addition, federal statutes, including the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, provide protections for people with disabilities, defined as both physical and mental impairments. == Background == The modern concept of eugenics was propounded in 1883 by Francis Galton, who also coined the name. The idea first became popular in the United States and had found proponents in Europe by the start


id: buck-v-bell-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck_v._Bell-1.md
category: reference
title: Buck v. Bell
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck_v._Bell
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:08.352062+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: buck-v-bell-20260505-0
summary:
On March 28, 1924, she gave birth to a daughter. Since Buck had been declared mentally incompetent to raise her child, the Dobbses adopted the baby and named her "Vivian Alice Elaine Dobbs". She attended Venable Public Elementary School of Charlottesville for four terms, from September 1930 until May 1932. By all accounts, Vivian was of average intelligence, far above feeblemindedness.She was a perfectly normal, quite average student, neither particularly outstanding nor much troubled. In those days before grade inflation, when C meant "good, 81–87" (as defined on her report card) rather than barely scraping by, Vivian Dobbs received A's and B's for deportment and C's for all academic subjects but mathematics (which was always difficult for her, and where she scored a D) during her first term in Grade 1A, from September 1930 to January 1931. She improved during her second term in 1B, meriting an A in deportment, C in mathematics, and B in all other academic subjects; she was placed on the honor roll in April 1931. Promoted to 2A, she had trouble during the fall term of 1931, failing mathematics and spelling but receiving A in deportment, B in reading, and C in writing and English.


id: buck-v-bell-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck_v._Bell-2.md
category: reference
title: Buck v. Bell
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck_v._Bell
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:08.352062+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: buck-v-bell-20260505-0
summary:
=== Legal appeals and rulings === The case then moved to the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia, where Whitehead offered a 5‑page compared to the state's 40-page brief. Buck lost there too. Her only recourse was to the U.S. Supreme Court, but that was merely an illusion: even if Whitehead had put forth an effort, Carrie's case was put before a Supreme Court with at least two avowed believers in eugenics: Chief Justice (and former president) William Howard Taft and Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. In 1915, Taft had written the introduction to the book How to Live, which contained a sizable portion devoted to eugenics. As for Holmes, in 1921, he told future justice Felix Frankfurter that he had no problem "restricting propagation by the undesirables and putting to death infants that didn't pass the examination." Buck and her guardian contended that the due process clause guarantees all adults the right to procreate which was being violated. They also made the argument that the Equal Protection Clause in the 14th Amendment was being violated since not all similarly situated people were being treated the same. The sterilization law was only for the "feeble-minded" at certain state institutions and


id: buck-v-bell-20260505-3
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck_v._Bell-3.md
category: reference
title: Buck v. Bell
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck_v._Bell
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:08.352062+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: buck-v-bell-20260505-0
summary:
=== Aftermath === According to famed eugenicist Harry H. Laughlin, whose written testimony was presented during the trial in his absence, Buck's legal defeat signaled the end of "eugenical sterilization's 'experimental period.'" Following the Supreme Court ruling, over two dozen states enacted similar laws, including Oregon and the Carolinas, doubling American sterilizations from 6,000 to more than 12,000 by 1947. Buck was sterilized on October 19, 1927, roughly five months after the Supreme Court trial verdict. She became the first Virginian sterilized since the 1924 Eugenical Sterilization Act passed. The Virginia sterilization law is said to have inspired Nazi Germany's 400,000 sterilizations, including those sanctioned under the 1933 Law for Protection Against Genetically Defective Offspring. Carrie Buck was operated upon, receiving a compulsory salpingectomy (a form of tubal ligation). She was later paroled from the institution as a domestic worker to a family in Bland, Virginia. She was an avid reader until her death in 1983. Her daughter Vivian had been pronounced "feeble minded" after a cursory examination by ERO field worker Dr. Arthur Estabrook. According to his report, Vivian "showed backwardness", thus the "three generations" of the majority opinion. It is worth noting that the child did very well


id: buck-v-bell-20260505-4
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck_v._Bell-4.md
category: reference
title: Buck v. Bell
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck_v._Bell
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:08.352062+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: buck-v-bell-20260505-0
summary:
Cohen, Adam (2016), Imbeciles: The Supreme Court, American Eugenics, and the Sterilization of Carrie Buck, Penguin, ISBN 978-1-59420-418-0. Cullen-DuPont, Kathryn. Encyclopedia of Women's History in America (Infobase Publishing, 2009) pp 37–38 Breed, Allen G. (August 13, 2011). "Eugenics victim, son fighting together for justice". Winfall, North Carolina. Associated Press. Archived from the original on March 6, 2019. Retrieved August 13, 2011. Bruinius, Harry (2007). Better for All the World: The Secret History of Forced Sterilization and America's Quest for Racial Purity. New York: Vintage Books. ISBN 978-0-375-71305-7. Leuchtenburg, William E. (1995), "Mr. Justice Holmes and Three Generations of Imbeciles", The Supreme Court Reborn: The Constitutional Revolution in the Age of Roosevelt, New York: Oxford, pp. 3–25, ISBN 978-0-19-511131-6. Lombardo, Paul (2008), Three Generations, No Imbeciles: Eugenics, the Supreme Court, and Buck v. Bell., Johns Hopkins University Press, p. 365, ISBN 978-0-8018-9010-9 Smith, J. David. The Sterilization of Carrie Buck (New Horizon Press, 1989) == External links == Text of Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927) is available from: CourtListener Findlaw Google Scholar Internet Archive Justia Library of Congress Professor Thomas D. Russell An account of the case from the Dolan DNA Learning Center Buck v. Bell (Case File #31681),


id: chemical-patent-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_patent-0.md
category: reference
title: Chemical patent
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_patent
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:09.617535+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: chemical-patent-20260505-0
summary:
A chemical patent, pharmaceutical patent or drug patent is a patent for an invention in the chemical or pharmaceuticals industry. Strictly speaking, in most jurisdictions, there are essentially no differences between the legal requirements to obtain a patent for an invention in the chemical or pharmaceutical fields, in comparison to obtaining a patent in the other fields, such as in the mechanical field. A chemical patent or a pharmaceutical patent is therefore not a sui generis right, i.e. a special legal type of patent. Chemical patent claims often use generic, Markush structures contained within them, named after the inventor Eugene Markush who won a lawsuit in the US in 1925 to allow such structures to be used in patent claims. These generic structures are used to make the patent claim as broad as possible. In the United States, patents on pharmaceuticals were considered unethical by the medical profession during most of the nineteenth-century. Drug patent terms in the US were extended from 17 to 20 years in 1994. Pharmaceutical patents are typically more valuable than any other type of patents, and thus play an essential role in the pharmaceutical industry. There are several reasons for this peculiarity: the cost of


id: clandestine-chemistry-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clandestine_chemistry-0.md
category: reference
title: Clandestine chemistry
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clandestine_chemistry
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:11.015131+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: clandestine-chemistry-20260505-0
summary:
Clandestine chemistry is chemistry carried out in secret, and particularly in illegal drug laboratories. Larger labs are usually run by gangs or organized crime intending to produce for distribution on the black market. Smaller labs can be run by individual chemists working clandestinely in order to synthesize smaller amounts of controlled substances or simply out of a hobbyist interest in chemistry, often because of the difficulty in ascertaining the purity of other, illegally synthesized drugs obtained on the black market. The term clandestine lab is generally used in any situation involving the production of illicit compounds, regardless of whether the facilities being used qualify as a true laboratory. == History == Ancient forms of clandestine chemistry included the manufacturing of explosives. From 1919 to 1933, the United States prohibited the sale, manufacture, or transportation of alcoholic beverages. This opened a door for brewers to supply their own town with alcohol. Just like modern-day drug labs, distilleries were placed in rural areas. The term moonshine generally referred to "corn whiskey", that is, a whiskey-like liquor made from corn. Today, American-made corn whiskey can be labeled or sold under that name, or as bourbon or Tennessee whiskey, depending on the details of


id: clandestine-chemistry-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clandestine_chemistry-1.md
category: reference
title: Clandestine chemistry
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clandestine_chemistry
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:11.015131+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: clandestine-chemistry-20260505-0
summary:
Operation Purple is a U.S. DEA driven international chemical control initiative designed to reduce the illicit manufacture of cocaine in the Andean Region, identify rogue firms and suspect individuals, gather intelligence on diversion methods, trafficking trends, and shipping routes, and take administrative, civil and/or criminal action as appropriate. Critical to the success of this operation is the communication network that gives notification of shipments and provides the government of the importer sufficient time to verify the legitimacy of the transaction and take appropriate action. The effects of this initiative have been dramatic and far-reaching. Operation Purple has exposed a significant vulnerability among traffickers, and has grown to include almost thirty nations. According to the DEA, Operation Purple has been highly effective at interfering with cocaine production. However, illicit chemists always find new methods to evade the DEA's scrutiny. In countries where strict chemical controls have been put in place, illicit drug production has been seriously affected. For example, few of the chemicals needed to process coca leaf into cocaine are manufactured in Bolivia or Peru. Most are smuggled in from neighbouring countries with advanced chemical industries or diverted from a smaller number of licit handlers. Increased interdiction of chemicals in


id: clandestine-chemistry-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clandestine_chemistry-2.md
category: reference
title: Clandestine chemistry
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clandestine_chemistry
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:11.015131+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: clandestine-chemistry-20260505-0
summary:
===== Methamphetamine ===== As of the early 1990s, methamphetamine use was concentrated among young white males in California and nearby states. Since then its use has spread both demographically and geographically. Methamphetamine has been a favorite among various populations including motorcycle gangs, truckers, laborers, soldiers, and ravers. Known as a "club drug", the National Institute on Drug Abuse tracks its incidence of use in children as young as twelve, and the prevalence of users increases with age. In the 1980s and early 1990s, most methamphetamine production in the United States occurred in small independent laboratories. Phenylacetone, one precursor of methamphetamine, became a Schedule II controlled immediate precursor in 1979. Underground chemists searched for alternative methods for producing methamphetamine. The two predominant methods which appeared both involve the reduction of ephedrine or pseudoephedrine to methamphetamine. At the time, neither was a watched chemical, and pills containing the substance could be bought by the thousands without raising any kind of suspicion. In the 1990s, the DEA recognized that legally imported precursors were being diverted to the production of methamphetamine. Changes to federal regulations in 1988 and throughout the 1990s enabled the DEA to more closely track the ephedrine and pseudoephedrine precursors. Many


id: clandestine-chemistry-20260505-3
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clandestine_chemistry-3.md
category: reference
title: Clandestine chemistry
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clandestine_chemistry
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:11.015131+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: clandestine-chemistry-20260505-0
summary:
In Oregon, Brett Sherry of the Oregon Clandestine Drug Lab Cleanup Program has been quoted as stating that only 10–20% of drug labs are discovered by police. Statistics reporting the prevalence of meth labs and arrest of meth producers can vary greatly from county to county and state to state. Factors affecting policing and reporting include funding, specialized training, support from local residents, and willingness to make the issue a priority in policing. How information is categorized and tracked may also inflate or minimize the apparent results. Missouri has reported some of the highest rates of meth-lab arrests in the country, and has pursued an aggressive and highly publicized policy of policing meth labs. This has resulted in as many as 205 cases per year in one county. In contrast, West Virginia reports and/or prosecutes very few cases. It's possible that these low numbers are because of cost. In WV, a police agency which reports a meth lab is responsible for the cost of its cleanup—which can cost tens of thousands of dollars, as proper disposal of toxic and hazardous materials is very expensive. The high cost of cleanup is a clear disincentive for all agencies, but especially those with


id: data-quality-act-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Quality_Act-0.md
category: reference
title: Data Quality Act
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Quality_Act
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:16.979534+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: data-quality-act-20260505-0
summary:
The Information Quality Act (IQA) or Data Quality Act (DQA), passed through the United States Congress in Section 515 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2001 (Pub. L. 106–554 (text) (PDF)). Because the Act was a two-sentence rider in a spending bill, it had no name given in the actual legislation. The Government Accountability Office uses the name "Information Quality Act". IQA directs the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to issue government-wide guidelines that "provide policy and procedural guidance to federal agencies for ensuring and maximizing the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of information (including statistical information) disseminated by Federal agencies". Other federal agencies are also required to publish their own guidelines for information quality and peer review agendas. == Text of the IQA == Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2001 Sec. 515 reads: (a) In General. – The Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall, by not later than September 30, 2001, and with public and Federal agency involvement, issue guidelines under sections 3504(d)(1) and 3516 of title 44, United States Code, that provide policy and procedural guidance to Federal agencies for ensuring and maximizing the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of information (including statistical information) disseminated by Federal


id: data-quality-act-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Quality_Act-1.md
category: reference
title: Data Quality Act
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Quality_Act
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:16.979534+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: data-quality-act-20260505-0
summary:
== Information Quality Act failing as a basis for law suits == The Competitive Enterprise Institute filed a lawsuit to prevent dissemination of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)'s "Climate Action Report 2002" published May 2002, claiming the research did not meet requirements of the Federal Data Quality Act (FDQA), which came into effect in October 2002. The case was dismissed in November 2003. In 2004, a multi-party dispute regarding the management of the Missouri River led to a case in which the District Court declared that "the IQA directs the Office of Management and Budget ("OMB") to issue guidelines that provide policy and procedural guidance to Federal agencies for ensuring and maximizing the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of information disseminated by the agency, the plain language of the legislation fails to define these terms. 44 U.S.C. § 3516. Moreover, the history of the legislation fails to provide any indication as to the scope of these terms. Absent any "meaningful standard" against which to evaluate the agency's discretion, the Court finds that Congress did not intend the IQA to provide a private cause of action, and therefore Blaske Marine Plaintiffs' IQA claim fails." Four days after this judgement the Department of


id: daubert-standard-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daubert_standard-0.md
category: reference
title: Daubert standard
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daubert_standard
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:18.264783+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: daubert-standard-20260505-0
summary:
In United States federal law, the Daubert standard ( DAW-bərt) is a rule of evidence regarding the admissibility of expert witness testimony. A party may raise a Daubert motion, a special motion in limine raised before or during trial, to exclude the presentation of unqualified evidence to the jury. The Daubert trilogy are the three United States Supreme Court cases that articulated the Daubert standard: Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (1993), which held that Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence did not incorporate the Frye standard as a basis for assessing the admissibility of scientific expert testimony, but that the rule incorporated a flexible reliability standard instead; General Electric Co. v. Joiner (1997), which held that a district court judge may exclude expert testimony when there are gaps between the evidence relied on by an expert and that person's conclusion, and that an abuse-of-discretion standard of review is the proper standard for appellate courts to use in reviewing a trial court's decision of whether it should admit expert testimony; Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael (1999), which held that the judge's gatekeeping function identified in Daubert applies to all expert testimony, including that which is non-scientific. Important appellate-level


id: daubert-standard-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daubert_standard-1.md
category: reference
title: Daubert standard
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daubert_standard
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:18.264783+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: daubert-standard-20260505-0
summary:
=== Timing === To attack expert testimony as inadmissible, counsel may bring pretrial motions, including motions in limine. The motion in limine may be brought prior to trial, although counsel may bring the motion during trial as well. A motion attacking expert testimony should be brought within a reasonable time after the close of discovery if the grounds for the objection can be reasonably anticipated. The hearing should be made well in advance of the first time a case appears on a trial calendar. In one case where a Daubert hearing was conducted on the day of the trial, in which the district court excluded all plaintiff's expert testimony, resulting in the dismissal of all claims, the appellate court remanded the case because of multiple irregularities and a defective record of lower court proceedings. The appellate court noted that in cases that rely heavily on expert testimony, a district court should set a discovery and trial schedule that realistically provides both sides with an adequate opportunity to introduce necessary evidence. The application of Federal Rule of Evidence 702 to proposed expert testimony can often be an uncertain process and is best conducted in such a manner that litigants have a


id: daubert-standard-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daubert_standard-2.md
category: reference
title: Daubert standard
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daubert_standard
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:18.264783+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: daubert-standard-20260505-0
summary:
If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise. In Daubert, the court ruled that nothing in the Federal Rules of Evidence governing expert evidence "gives any indication that 'general acceptance' is a necessary precondition to the admissibility of scientific evidence. Moreover, such a rigid standard would be at odds with the Rules' liberal thrust and their general approach of relaxing the traditional barriers to 'opinion' testimony." By requiring experts to provide relevant opinions grounded in reliable methodology, proponents of Daubert were satisfied that these standards would result in a fair and rational resolution of the scientific and technological issues which lie at the heart of product liability adjudication. Daubert has not appeared to further the Federal Rules philosophy of admitting generally all relevant testimony, and specifically of relaxing the traditional barriers to 'opinion' testimony. The Daubert decision has instead been heralded by some political commentators as one of the most important Supreme Court decisions in imposing higher barriers for toxic tort


id: daubert-standard-20260505-3
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daubert_standard-3.md
category: reference
title: Daubert standard
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daubert_standard
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:18.264783+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: daubert-standard-20260505-0
summary:
== International influence == The Canadian Supreme Court expressly discussed the Daubert standard in R. v. J.-L.J., [2000]. In J.-L.J., the court took a look at the development of U.S. law in this regard, noting the U.S. Supreme Court's rejection of the Frye standard and its replacement with the Daubert standard. While the court did note that "Daubert must be read in light of the specific text of the Federal Rules of Evidence, which differs from our own procedures", the court also stated in the same sentence that "the U.S. Supreme Court did list a number of factors that could be helpful in evaluating the soundness of novel science." The court then incorporated elements from the Daubert standard in their decision regarding the Quebec Court of Appeal ruling while ultimately rejecting the lower court's decision and reinstating the defendant's conviction. Later, in 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada in White Burgess Langille Inman v. Abbott and Haliburton Co. [2015] 2 SCR 182 endorsed the parts of R v. J.-L.J. that cited Daubert, saying: "in the case of an opinion based on novel or contested science or science used for a novel purpose, the reliability of the underlying science for that


id: european-law-on-drug-precursors-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_law_on_drug_precursors-0.md
category: reference
title: European law on drug precursors
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_law_on_drug_precursors
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:19.548051+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: european-law-on-drug-precursors-20260505-0
summary:
European law on illicit drug precursors: Regulation (EC) No 273/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 on drug precursors (contains list of substances) Council Regulation (EC) No 111/2005 of 22 December 2004 laying down rules for the monitoring of trade between the Union and third countries in drug precursors. Consolidated text (2021) (contains the same list of substances) Commission Regulation (EC) No 297/2009 of 8 April 2009 amending Regulation (EC) No 1277/2005 laying down implementing rules for Regulation (EC) No 273/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council on drug precursors and for Council Regulation (EC) No 111/2005 laying down rules for the monitoring of trade between the Community and third countries in drug precursors The list of 23 substances is identical to list of UN-controlled drug precursors, except for the different categorization and inclusion of stereoisomers in EU Category 1. == List of substances == === Category 1 Precursors === phenylacetone methyl 2-phenylacetoacetate (MAPA) methyl 2-methyl-3-phenyloxirane-2-carboxylate (BMK methyl glycidate) 2-methyl-3-phenyloxirane-2-carboxylic acid (BMK glycidic acid) N-acetylanthranilic acid alpha-phenylacetoacetamide (APAA) alpha-phenylacetoacetonitrile (APAAN) isosafrole (cis + trans) 3,4-methylenedioxyphenylpropan-2-one piperonal safrole methyl 3-(1,3-benzodioxol-5-yl)-2-methyloxirane-2-carboxylate (PMK methyl glycidate) 3-(1,3-benzodioxol-5-yl)-2-methyloxirane-2-carboxylic acid (PMK glycidic acid) 4-anilino-N-phenethylpiperidine (ANPP) N-phenethyl-4-piperidone (NPP) ephedrine


id: harvey-v-horan-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvey_v._Horan-0.md
category: reference
title: Harvey v. Horan
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvey_v._Horan
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:20.751122+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: harvey-v-horan-20260505-0
summary:
Harvey v. Horan, 278 F. 3d 370 (4th Cir. 2002), is a federal court case dealing with felons' rights of access to DNA testing. The Eastern Virginia District Court originally found that felons were entitled access to DNA testing on potentially exculpatory evidence, but this finding was later overturned by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. Nevertheless, the case paved the way for the Innocence Protection Act, which ensures that convicted offenders can try to prove their innocence by requesting DNA testing on evidence in government's possession that was used in their case. == The case == On April 30, 1990, James Harvey was convicted of rape and forcible sodomy by a jury in Fairfax County Circuit Court. He was sentenced to 25 years in prison. One piece of evidence used to convict Harvey was restriction fragment length polymorphism ("RFLP") DNA testing. The victim had two assailants, and this test prevented both Harvey and his co-defendant from being excluded as a possible source of spermatozoa recovered from the victim through conventional serology. Harvey was also implicated by testimony from his co-defendant, the victim, and a third prosecution witness. However, this testimony indicated that Harvey had not ejaculated during the attack.


id: harvey-v-horan-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvey_v._Horan-1.md
category: reference
title: Harvey v. Horan
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvey_v._Horan
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:20.751122+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: harvey-v-horan-20260505-0
summary:
== The appeal == On September 26, 2001, Horan's lawyer, Jack L. Gould, appealed the decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. He contended that § 1983 was not an appropriate vehicle for Harvey's action. He stated that the procedural flaws in the claim required that it be dismissed because it was really a successive petition for a writ of habeas corpus and an attempt to get around strict rules and deadlines. On January 23, 2002, the court concluded that Harvey's rights had not been violated and that the lower court had erred in its decision. Fourth Circuit Chief Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III wrote the opinion, in which Judge Niemeyer joined. Judge King wrote a concurring opinion. The majority opinion stated that the claim was, in effect, a petition for a writ of habeas corpus brought without leave of court. According to a previous case, Heck v. Humphrey (1994), a convicted criminal defendant cannot bring a § 1983 action that would "necessarily imply the invalidity of his conviction or sentence" unless the defendant can prove that his "conviction or sentence has already been invalidated." In this decision, the Supreme Court found that civil tort


id: harvey-v-horan-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvey_v._Horan-2.md
category: reference
title: Harvey v. Horan
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvey_v._Horan
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:20.751122+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: harvey-v-horan-20260505-0
summary:
== Fallout == After the January 2002 decision was handed down, Harvey applied to Virginia's Fairfax Circuit Court for DNA testing based on a 2001 law allowing felons increased access to potentially exculpatory biological evidence that had not previously been subjected to the current DNA testing method. On March 1, 2002, the court ordered the Division of Forensic Science to conduct the testing. On May 15, 2002, after the testing was completed, the division filed a certificate of analysis stating that Harvey could not be eliminated as a possible contributor to the sperm fractions found on the victim. On September 24, 2002, Harvey filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the Virginia Supreme Court, challenging the validity of the certificate of analysis and related test results. The court dismissed the petition on June 10, 2004, saying that it did not have jurisdiction to consider it. Back in March 2002, the federal appeal had come before the full Fourth Circuit as an en banc reconsideration (as opposed to the original three-judge panel). By this time, the issue was moot, but two judges, J. Michael Luttig and Wilkinson, wrote anyway. Luttig wrote that the "right of access to evidence


id: institute-for-law-science-and-global-security-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_for_Law,_Science_and_Global_Security-0.md
category: reference
title: Institute for Law, Science and Global Security
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_for_Law,_Science_and_Global_Security
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:21.974381+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: institute-for-law-science-and-global-security-20260505-0
summary:
The Institute for Law, Science and Global Security in the Department of Government at Georgetown University was established to promote teaching and research in the area of intersection between international law and international relations. The Institute sponsors undergraduate and graduate courses and runs a Master's Program in International Law and Global Security. The Institute seeks to inform the public policy debate about the nature, role and importance of international law as it connected to issues of science and global security. To this end, it sponsors a series of specific programs including the Program on Non-Proliferation Law and Policy, which is jointly run with the James Martin Center of the Monterey Institute of International Studies. Most recently, the Institute has begun a special initiative in the area of cyber security. Among the participants in this initiative have been former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency General Michael Hayden, Siobhan Gorman, national security correspondent of The Wall Street Journal, and Suzanne Spaulding, former General Counsel for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. Since its creation, the Institute has also sponsored events with a variety of other speakers, including Paul D. Clement, former Solicitor General of the United States, Bill Richardson, the Governor


id: michael-kopelman-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Kopelman-0.md
category: reference
title: Michael Kopelman
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Kopelman
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:23.840629+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: michael-kopelman-20260505-0
summary:
Michael David Kopelman (born February 8, 1950) is a British researcher of memory disorders, having contributed for more than 30 years to the development of cognitive neuropsychology and cognitive neuropsychiatry. Until his retirement in 2015, he was lead clinician at the Neuropsychiatry and Memory Disorders Clinic at St Thomas' National Health Service teaching hospital in Central London. Beginning in 1981, he also served as an expert witness in legal proceedings, including high-profile cases. == Education == Kopelman's first degree was in psychology. He subsequently studied medicine at Middlesex University, and in 1978 completed his medical degree at the University of London. From 1980 to 1988, Kopelman trained in psychiatry at Bethlem-Maudsley Joint Hospitals. In 1988, he earned his PhD from the Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London. == Research and career == Kopelman's research interests include neurological memory disorders, especially retrograde amnesia; confabulation; executive function; semantic dementia; and psychogenic amnesia, particularly the nature of amnesia for offences. === Academic career === From 1989 to 2015, Kopelman was first a consultant neuropsychiatrist, then professor of neuropsychiatry at Guy's, King's and St Thomas' School of Medicine. He is Emeritus Professor of Neuropsychiatry at the Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and


id: legal-psychology-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_psychology-0.md
category: reference
title: Legal psychology
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_psychology
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:25.069000+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: legal-psychology-20260505-0
summary:
Legal psychology is a field focused on the application of psychological principles within the legal system and its interactions with individuals. Professionals in this area are involved in understanding, assessing, evaluating potential jurors, investigating crimes and crime scenes, conducting forensic investigations The term "legal psychology" distinguishes this practical branch of psychology from the more theory-oriented field of clinical psychology. Together, legal psychology and forensic psychology form the field more generally recognized as "psychology and law". Following earlier efforts by psychologists to address legal issues, psychology and law became a field of study in the 1960s, though that originating concern has lessened over time. The multidisciplinary American Psychological Association's Division 41, the American Psychology–Law Society, is active with the goal of promoting the contributions of psychology to the understanding of law and legal systems through research; as well as providing education to psychologists in legal issues and providing education to legal personnel on psychological issues. Further, its mandate is to inform the psychological and legal communities, along with the general public, about current research, education, and services in the field of psychology and law. There are similar societies in Canada, Britain, and Europe. The Canadian Psychological Association also serves as a


id: legal-psychology-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_psychology-1.md
category: reference
title: Legal psychology
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_psychology
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:25.069000+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: legal-psychology-20260505-0
summary:
== Roles of a legal psychologist == === Academics and research === Many legal psychologists work as professors in university psychology departments, criminal justice departments or law schools. Like other professors, legal psychologists generally conduct and publish empirical research, teach various classes, and mentor graduate and undergraduate students. Many legal psychologists also conduct research in a more general area of psychology (e.g., social, clinical, cognitive) with only a tangential legal focus. Those legal psychologists who work in law schools almost always hold a JD in addition to a PhD. Academics and researchers make up a significant amount of the psychologists involved today with applying psychology to legal contexts. While many think of clinical psychology as the main form of psychology in the law, however the utility of psychology, including applications of social, developmental, and neurological psychology has given significant amount of evidence-based methods to support a fair, proper, and humane justice system. The application of psychological knowledge and principles of evidence-based care are significant to maintaining fairness and integrity across the criminal justice system. === Amicus briefs === One method that psychologists and researchers use to provide best practices to the justice system is through amicus briefs (defined by the


id: legal-psychology-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_psychology-2.md
category: reference
title: Legal psychology
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_psychology
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:25.069000+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: legal-psychology-20260505-0
summary:
== Example of legal psychology in action == One of the earliest experiments on eyewitness reliability was conducted in March 1893 J. McKeen Cattell posted questions to fifty-six of his students at Columbia University. The questions he asked his students were comparable to those asked in a court of justice. What he found was that it was reasonable to conclude eyewitness accounts of events were unreliable. His students were all sure they were mostly correct, even when they were not, and some were hesitant when they were in fact correct. He could not figure out specifically why each student had inaccurate testimonies. Research into eyewitness testimony became more popular nearly a century later in the 1980s and 1990s. As some research emerged about the potential unreliability of eyewitness memory concerns rose given the prevalent use of eyewitnesses for key evidence. Many details of crimes are obtained by interviewing witnesses, some of whom might testify in court, providing their account of the event into official evidence. Eyewitness testimony and identification of an accused is often a salient piece of evidence which unduly influences the opinions of the jury. As a result, incorrect or false eyewitness testimony has been found to be


id: jules-li-geois-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jules_Liégeois-0.md
category: reference
title: Jules Liégeois
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jules_Liégeois
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:26.427074+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: jules-li-geois-20260505-0
summary:
Jules Joseph Liégeois (30 November 1833 – 14 August 1908), Knight of the Legion of Honour ("Chevalier de l'Ordre de la Légion d'Honneur"), and the Professor of administrative law at the University of Nancy for forty years, was a universally respected French jurist who was also widely known as an important foundation member, promoter, and defender of the Nancy School of Hypnosis — some would even say "the founder" of the School, not "just a participant" (Touzeil-Divina, 2024a). In addition to his numerous influential publications on administrative law and the relationship between economics and the law, he was internationally recognized for the significance, scope, and systematic nature of his critical and innovative personal investigations into natural/spontaneous somnambulism, hypnotism, and hypnotic suggestion in the wider medico-legal domain. He "was the first forensic scientist to scientifically address the medical question of hypnotism", and "was the leading researcher in the nineteenth century into the possibilities of the abuse of hypnosis for the purposes of crime", not only in the sense of crimes committed upon a hypnotized subject, and those committed by a hypnotized subject, but also in the sense of the hypnotized subject having no memory of either their hypnotization or their subsequent


id: jules-li-geois-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jules_Liégeois-1.md
category: reference
title: Jules Liégeois
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jules_Liégeois
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:26.427074+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: jules-li-geois-20260505-0
summary:
At the time of their (1784) inquiries, the two Royal Commissions on Animal Magnetism — one was from the Paris Faculty of Medicine) and the French Royal Academy of Sciences (i.e., Bailly, 1784a; 1800; 1784b), and the other from the Royal Society of Medicine of Paris (i.e., Poissonnier, et al., 1784) — independently and emphatically concluded from their controlled trials and "blind" experiments that the (metaphysical) claims made by Mesmer's former associate, Charles d’Eslon, for the substantial existence of "animal magnetism" (le magnétisme animal) and of a substantial (rather than metaphorical) "magnetic fluid" (le fluide magnétique) were nothing more than a case (as Mesmer himself had argued) of the inappropriate reification of metaphor (i.e, Alfred Whitehead's "fallacy of misplaced concreteness"), and were, therefore, entirely without foundation. ==== Dominant ideas ==== Anticipating the (c.1820) work of Thomas Brown, the Chair of Moral Philosophy at Edinburgh University, James Braid's teacher, in relation to the suggestive influence of "dominant ideas", and the work of Braid himself, in relation to the "mono-ideo-dynamic principle of action" concept (Braid, 1855) that he had developed from the work of his associates William Benjamin Carpenter, and Daniel Noble, both of the (1784) investigatory committees concluded that — having


id: jules-li-geois-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jules_Liégeois-2.md
category: reference
title: Jules Liégeois
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jules_Liégeois
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:26.427074+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: jules-li-geois-20260505-0
summary:
"The hypnotic condition is not an abnormal one, it does not create new functions nor extraordinary phenomena; it develops those which are produced in the waking condition; because of a new psychical modality, it exaggerates the normal susceptibility to suggestion, which we all possess to some extent; our psychical condition is modified so as to carry out the images and impressions evoked with greater boldness and distinctness." — Hippolyte Bernheim (1888). "Hypnotism, like natural sleep, exalts the imagination, and makes the brain more susceptible to suggestion. ... It is a physiological law, that sleep puts the brain into such a psychical condition that the imagination accepts and recognizes as real the impressions transmitted to it. To provoke this special psychical condition by means of hypnotism, and to cultivate the suggestibility thus artificially increased with the aim of cure or relief, this is the role of psychotherapeutics." — Hippolyte Bernheim (1888, emphasis in original). Of the foundation members of "Suggestion School" — Prof. Jules Liégeois (faculty of Law), Prof. Hippolyte Bernheim (1840–1919) (faculty of Medicine), and Prof. Henri-Étienne Beaunis (1830–1921) (chair of Physiology), from the University of Nancy — the first to associate himself with the experiments, principles, and practices of


id: jules-li-geois-20260505-3
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jules_Liégeois-3.md
category: reference
title: Jules Liégeois
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jules_Liégeois
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:26.427074+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: jules-li-geois-20260505-0
summary:
=== "Waking" and "hypnotic" suggestion === Although Liégeois' initial experiments reflected his academic interest in the legal parallels between hypnotism and natural/spontaneous (i.e., rather than "mesmeric" or "artificially induced") somnambulism, his major work over an extended period involved a thorough investigation into the principles and practices responsible for a far wider range of applications of "suggestion" — involving both 'waking' suggestion and 'hypnotic' suggestion — than their medical and/or therapeutic applications alone. In particular, given his forensic interest in the effects of "suggestion" and their significance in relation to issues of posthypnotic amnesia, and the personal responsibility/culpability for the phenomena produced by "suggestion", he was also deeply interested in the nature, form, and content of the "suggestions" made. Driven by his concern with the philosophical and forensic (rather than therapeutic) aspects of hypnotism and hypnotic suggestion, Liégeois asserted, along with Charcot's associate Pierre Janet (1920, pp.284–285), that the critical feature of the subject-operator interaction was not the operator's making of the "suggestion", but, instead, was the subject's taking of the "suggestion" made by the operator. As Yeates (2016a) observed, in the same way that "one is only a "hypnotist" if one induces "hypnotism" ... an idea is only a "suggestion"


id: jules-li-geois-20260505-4
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jules_Liégeois-4.md
category: reference
title: Jules Liégeois
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jules_Liégeois
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:26.427074+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: jules-li-geois-20260505-0
summary:
"[In the mid-1880s, in addition to concerns relating to the possibility] of rape under hypnotic sleep ... another type of moral concern associated with hypnotism was gaining public attention abroad: the possibility of inciting people under hypnosis to commit criminal acts. It was Jules Liégeois, the French lawyer associated with the Nancy School of hypnotism, who in 1884 first pointed to this danger in a report for the French Academy of Moral and Political Sciences." — Kaat Wils (2017). Liégeois' own experiments, relating to both serious and petty crimes, which employed a wide range of suggested "mock" activities involving fake weapons, fake poisons, etc. — i.e., "crimes expérimentaux" ('experimental crimes'), or "crimes de laboratoire" ('laboratory crimes), in place of "crimes véritable" ('real crimes') — was work for which he was much admired by the experimental psychologist, Joseph Delbœuf (e.g., Delbœuf, 1892), and much denigrated by Charcot's associate, Georges Gilles de la Tourette (e.g., Gilles de la Tourette, 1891b). However, as Bogousslavsky, Walusinski & Veyrunes (2009, pp. 197-198) observe, Gilles de la Tourette's criticism was somewhat unfair: not only had Gilles de la Tourette (some time earlier) personally conducted similar "hypnotic murder" experiments involving fake pistols and mock poisons at the


id: jules-li-geois-20260505-5
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jules_Liégeois-5.md
category: reference
title: Jules Liégeois
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jules_Liégeois
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:26.427074+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: jules-li-geois-20260505-0
summary:
=== Prosecution === The two expert witnesses for the prosecution, Paul Brouardel, the eminent professor of forensics at the Faculté de Médecine de Paris, and Gilbert Ballet, Charcot's chef de clinique ('clinical head') at the Salpêtrière, gave evidence that, in their view, any such thing was impossible; and in an extensive (later) discussion of the matter, Georges Gilles de La Tourette, a former pupil of Brouardel and close associate of Charcot, published an extensive account of the matter (i.e., 1891a, and 1891b), "which denied all possibility of a violent act under hypnosis and by suggestion" (Walusinski, 2011, p. 76). === Defence === Called upon as an expert witness for Bompard's defence as a representative of the Nancy School, Liégeois produced extensive details of the numerous experiments that had satisfied both himself and his Nancy colleagues that crimes could be committed by (innocent) subjects under the influence of hypnotic suggestion. His constant emphasis throughout his testimony that both he and Bernheim held the same opinions is easily explained: Liégeois was a last-minute substitute for Bernheim — and was, therefore, only present as a proxy for Bernheim, rather than as Liégeois, the legal expert who had addressed the Académie des Sciences Morales


id: jules-li-geois-20260505-6
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jules_Liégeois-6.md
category: reference
title: Jules Liégeois
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jules_Liégeois
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:26.427074+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: jules-li-geois-20260505-0
summary:
1863: admitted as an Associate Member of the Académie de Stanislas on 23 January 1863. 1874: admitted as a Full Member of the Académie de Stanislas on 27 March 1874. 1881: admitted as a Full Member of the Society of Comparative Legislation in May 1881. 1881-1882: served as President of the Académie de Stanislas. 1886: made a Corresponding Member of the Society for Psychical Research. 1889: appointed vice-president of the First International Congress of Experimental and Therapeutic Hypnotism, in Paris, in August 1889. c.1890: made an Honorary Member of the Gesellschaft Für Psychologische Forschung ('Society for Psychological Research'). 1892: appointed vice-president of the Second International Congress of Experimental Psychology, in London, in August 1892. 1897: appointed Honorary President of the International Congress of Neurology, Psychiatry, Medical Electricity, and Hypnology, in Brussels, in 1897. 1899: made a Corresponding Member of the Académie des Sciences Morales et Politiques, the organization to which he had made a significant presentation in 1884. 1900: appointed vice-president of the Second International Congress of Experimental and Therapeutic Hypnotism, in Paris, in August 1900. 1904: made a Chevalier (Knight) of the Légion d'honneur (Legion of Honour), by decree, on 26 July 1904. == Memorials == === Bains-les-Bains (1909)


id: national-clearinghouse-for-science-technology-and-the-law-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Clearinghouse_for_Science,_Technology_and_the_Law-0.md
category: reference
title: National Clearinghouse for Science, Technology and the Law
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Clearinghouse_for_Science,_Technology_and_the_Law
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:27.710402+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: national-clearinghouse-for-science-technology-and-the-law-20260505-0
summary:
The National Clearinghouse for Science, Technology and the Law at Stetson University College of Law is an organization that provides information sharing and professional development to forensic scientists, lawyers, judges, other legal professionals, law enforcement personnel, educators, and the general public. Sponsored by a grant from the National Institute of Justice, NCSTL offers educational programs and a database of forensic-related information. Within the context of the promotion of justice based on sound science and technology, NCSTL focuses on raising awareness and fostering communication and understanding among the various parties interested in scientific evidence and expert testimony. == Free Forensics Database == One of the primary purposes of NCSTL is to provide a resource that collects and tracks the latest available sources related to forensics and technology. NCSTL scrutinizes and disseminates useful information in the form of a research database on the Internet that is free and available to the public. The NCSTL database was first offered live to the public in February 2005. It collects and distributes bibliographic information on thousands of court decisions, pieces of legislation, legal and scientific publications, news and media features, websites and educational opportunities. Using the database, researchers can choose to view all types of


id: neurolaw-20260505-0
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurolaw-0.md
category: reference
title: Neurolaw
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurolaw
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:29.062328+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: neurolaw-20260505-0
summary:
Neurolaw is a field of interdisciplinary study that explores the effects of discoveries in neuroscience on legal rules and standards. Drawing from neuroscience, philosophy, social psychology, cognitive neuroscience, and criminology, neurolaw practitioners seek to address not only the descriptive and predictive issues of how neuroscience is and will be used in the legal system, but also the normative issues of how neuroscience should and should not be used. The rapid growth of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) research has led to new insights on neuroanatomical structure and function, which has led to a greater understanding of human behavior and cognition. As a response, there has been an emergence of questions regarding how these findings can be applied to criminology and legal processes. Major areas of current neurolaw research include courtroom applications, legal implications of neuroscience findings, and how neuroscience-related jurisdiction can be created and applied. Despite the growing interest in neurolaw and its potential applications, the legal realm recognizes the substantial opportunity for misuse and is proceeding cautiously with novel research outcomes. == History == The term neurolaw was first coined by J. Sherrod Taylor in 1991, in a Neuropsychology journal article analyzing the role of psychologists and lawyers in


id: neurolaw-20260505-1
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurolaw-1.md
category: reference
title: Neurolaw
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurolaw
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:29.062328+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: neurolaw-20260505-0
summary:
=== Insanity defense === The tendency of the United States criminal justice system has been to limit the degree to which one can claim innocence based on mental illness. During the middle of the 20th century many courts, through the Durham Rules and the American Law Institute Model Penal Code, regarded impaired volition as legitimate grounds for the insanity defense. However, when John Hinckley was acquitted due to insanity in 1982, a reversal of this opinion occurred, which spurred a narrowing definition of mental illness. Insanity decisions became increasingly based on the M’Naghten Rules, which asserted that unless one was able to prove that a mental illness kept him or her from knowing that their actions were wrong, or knowing the disposition of the criminal act, one would not be able to be tried as criminally insane. Contemporary research conducted on the prefrontal cortex has criticized this standpoint because it considers impaired volition as a factor. Many researchers and courts are beginning to consider "irresistible impulse" as legitimate grounds for mental illness. One of the factors neurosciences have added to the insanity defense is the claim that the brain “made someone do it.” In these cases, the argument is based


id: neurolaw-20260505-2
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurolaw-2.md
category: reference
title: Neurolaw
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurolaw
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:29.062328+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: neurolaw-20260505-0
summary:
=== Epigenetics === Current research is exploring how genetic analysis can be used to assess risk and predict atypical behaviors. Studies have shown links between violent behaviors and a low allele variant of the MAOA gene. Preliminary research suggests that males that have this dysfunctional gene and have experienced childhood abuse are several hundred times more likely to commit a violent crime than those with normal MAOA gene expression. Findings like this have sparked a conversation about 'neuroprediction' or using genetics and neuroimaging modalities to predict criminal behavior and assess individual risk. If the science behind prediction improves, lawmakers will need to decide the role that genetic, neuroanatomical, or neuropathic predictions can play in legal decisions for risk assessment, particularly when a criminal is being sentenced or released. === Neuroimaging === Understanding structural and mechanistic neural dysfunction in criminals can help to determine motives and define criminal responsibility. fMRI is particularly important because it allows for detailed functional mapping of the human brain. fMRI measures blood oxygen level dependent (BOLD) contrast, which allows us to view the most active areas of the brain at a given moment based on blood flow. This imaging modality allows researchers to identify and understand


id: neurolaw-20260505-3
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurolaw-3.md
category: reference
title: Neurolaw
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurolaw
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:29.062328+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: neurolaw-20260505-0
summary:
=== Criminal law === In the United States, brain scan results have been increasingly utilized during the sentencing phase of trials, with the rate of cases involving neuroscience evidence doubling from 2006 to 2009. In two instances occurring in California and New York, defendants were able to reduce their sentence of first-degree murder to manslaughter using neuroimaging. Each case presented brain scans suggesting hindered neurological function hoping to mitigate their responsibility in the crime. Brain images were also used in the case of Harrington v. State of Iowa in 2003 as evidence for the defense. However, in the case of Harrington v. State of Iowa, the brain images were solely shown to the judge and not a jury panel, reducing the ability of this case to be used as precedent for utilizing brain imaging as evidence. In Mumbai, India, the legal system has taken a more rapid approach in applying neuroscience and has already incorporated it into criminal convictions. In 2008, an Indian woman was convicted of murder based on strong circumstantial evidence, including a brain scan that suggested her guilt. This conviction was sharply criticized by Hank Greely, a professor of law at Stanford University. Greely contested the scan


id: neurolaw-20260505-4
file: data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurolaw-4.md
category: reference
title: Neurolaw
tags: science, encyclopedia
source_url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurolaw
date_saved: 2026-05-05T04:27:29.062328+00:00
instance: kb-cron
parent: neurolaw-20260505-0
summary:
== Cautions and concerns == Public opinion of neurolaw is influenced by cultural, political, and media-related factors. Surveys show that the general public does not have a well-formed understanding of neurolaw. Approval seems to depend highly on how the topic is framed and may even vary depending on partisanship. Due to glorified depictions of forensics labs on popular television shows, brain imaging has faced criticism for having a "CSI effect". It is possible that some people have a false understanding of forensic science based on inaccurate portrayals. This could lead to them having a stronger opinion about technological evidence or neurolaw initiatives. Neuroscience is still not fully understood. There is not enough evidence of structural and functional relationships to be able to confidently link a brain feature to a criminal behavior or issue. This uncertainty leaves room for misuse of neuroscientific evidence in a courtroom. American professor of law and psychology Stephen J. Morse described the abuse of neuroscience in courtrooms with a pseudo-disease he called "brain overclaim syndrome". He comments on the idea of people having diminished responsibility or no responsibility for their actions because those actions were caused by "the brain", in situations where the science could not


