信息公告
当前位置: 首页 > 讲座通知 > 正文
【院庆法学家国际论坛第15讲】加利福尼亚黑斯廷斯法学院院长David Faigman:将科学研究融入法律判决制作的挑战
作者: 时间:2017-12-13 浏览次数:

讲座主题

将科学研究融入法律判决制作的挑战:美国的经验

The Challenges of Integrating Scientific Research into Legal Decision Making: The American Experience


主讲人:David Faigman,(加利福尼亚黑斯廷斯法学院院长、John F. Digardi特聘教授)

时间:2017年12月18日(周一)15:00-17:00  

地点:北京航空航天大学学院路校区如心楼306


 

主讲人简介

Chancellor & Dean David Faigman is the John F. Digardi Distinguished Professor of Law at the University of California Hastings College of the Law and holds an appointment as Professor in theSchoolofMedicine(Dept. of Psychiatry) at theUniversityofCalifornia,San Francisco. He received both his M.A. (Psychology) and J.D. from theUniversityofVirginia. Professor Faigman clerked for the Honorable Thomas M. Reavley, Senior Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

He is the author of over 50 articles and essays, and has published in a variety of outlets, including theChicago,Virginia,Pennsylvaniaand Northwestern law reviews, Science, Sociological Methods & Research and Nature Reviews Neuroscience. He is also the author of three books, Constitutional Fictions: A Unified Theory of Constitutional Facts (Oxford, 2008), Laboratory of Justice: The Supreme Court’s 200-Year Struggle to Integrate Science and the Law (Henry Holt & Co. 2004) and Legal Alchemy: The Use and Misuse of Science in the Law (W.H. Freeman,1999). In addition, Professor Faigman is a co-author/co-editor of the five-volume treatise Modern Scientific Evidence: The Law and Science of Expert Testimony (with Cheng, Mnookin, Murphy Sanders & Slobogin). The treatise has been cited widely by courts, including several times by the U.S. Supreme Court. Professor Faigman was a member of the National Academies of Science panel that investigated the scientific validity of polygraphs, is a member of the MacArthur Law and Neuroscience Network and served as a Senior Advisor to the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology’s Report, “Forensic Science in Criminal Courts: Ensuring Scientific Validity of Feature-Comparison Methods.”

CopyRight© 2015 北航法学院 All rights reserved