A Case Study on Damaged Brains & Legal Culpability
Transcript of A Case Study on Damaged Brains & Legal Culpability
THEBACKGROUND&DEFINITIONS
Chronictraumaticencephalopathy(CTE)isaneurodegenerativedisordercausedby
repeatedheadinjuriesovertime.Characterizedbyacollectionofneuropsychiatricsymptoms
(e.g.,cognitiveimpairment,personalitychanges,depression,andsuicidality),CTEhistopathologicallyresemblesAlzheimer’s
diseaseandcanonlybedefinitivelydiagnosedpost-mortemonautopsy.Thereisnocure.
AaronHernandezandChronicTraumaticEncephalopathy:ACaseStudyonDamagedBrains&LegalCulpability
SunidhiRamesh,BSMDCandidateatSidneyKimmelMedicalCollegeinPhiladelphia,PA
THESTORYOFAARONHERNANDEZ
AaronJosefHernandezbeganplayingAmericanfootballateightyearsold,risingtofameovertheyearstoeventuallyjointheNewEnglandPatriotsandbecome“theNFL’sbest
tightend.”
2013:Hernandezischargedwiththefirst-degreemurderofOdinLloyd2014:HernandezisindictedonmurderchargesforadoublehomicideinBoston2015:Hernandezisconvictedofthefirst-degreemurderofOdinLloydbyagrandjury2017:Hernandezisfoundhangingbyhisbedsheetsinhisjailcell
AnautopsylaterfoundthathesufferedfromthemostseverecaseofCTEeverrecordedin
apersonhisage.Hewas27yearsold.
POSSIBLEGUIDELINESFORTHEUSEOFCT/MRIINCOURTS1. Understandingneuroimaging,itslimitations,anditsmeaning: Ifthisevidenceistobeadmissible,
judges,juries,andattorneysneedtobetrainedinthevalue,meaning,andlimitationsofthesescans— thatthesescansyieldpicturesthataretheninterpreted.
2. Recognizingtheslipperyslopeofinferringastateofmind:Wheredowedrawthelinebetweenperson-to-personvariationandaseriousabnormalitythatcausedacrimetobecommitted?Whataretheparametersofan“averagebrain?”Howdifferentis“abnormal?”Casestudiesshouldbereferencedtounderstandhowabnormalitiesinspecificregionscouldimpactbehavior.
3. Protectingtheprivacyofthedefendant: Onlypertinentneuroimaginginformationshouldbedisclosed,andonlyforaspecificpurpose.
4. Identifyingthereliabilityandaccuracyoftheresults:Atleasttwoindependent,separatetestsmustbeconductedwithmorethanoneneurologisttocorroboratethefindings.Ifanyinconsistenciesarefound,eitherbetweenthetwotestsorbetweentheneurologists’opinions,theinformationshouldbedeemedinadmissibleonthegroundsofbeingunreliable.
5. Implementingneuroimagingonlywhennecessary: Neuroimagingshouldnotbeopenforuseineverycase,andprotectionsarounditsusemustbeestablished.
6. Avoidingneuroimagingasthe“end-all-be-all”: Neuroimagingshouldneverbeusedasthesoleevidenceprovidedtodemonstratethementalcapacityofanindividual.
CONCLUSIONS
Withinthelegalsphere,adefendantcanshowthatthankstohisdisorder,hisbehaviorwasnotvoluntary,thathelackedthementalstateessentialtoenactthecrime,orthatheis
lawfullyinsane.Thisdefense,withthehelpofneuroimaging,couldhavechangedthe
outcomeoftheHernandeztrial.
However,thelinearcausalitybetweenaneurologicdiagnosisandanindividual’ssubsequentmentalstateand/orconductremainsunclear.Thelegalsystemmust
carefullyfollowdevelopmentsfromresearchonneuroimagingtoestablishcarefulguidelinesforthepermissibilityofneuroimagingincourts.
REFERENCES1. Aharoni,Eyal,etal."Canneurologicalevidencehelpcourtsassess
criminalresponsibility?Lessonsfromlawandneuroscience."AnnalsoftheNewYorkAcademyofSciences1124.1(2008):145-160.
2. Wasserman,David,andJosephineJohnston."Seeingresponsibility:canneuroimagingteachusanythingaboutmoralandlegalresponsibility?." HastingsCenterReport 44.s2(2014):S37-S49.
3. McKee,AnnC.,etal."Chronictraumaticencephalopathyinathletes:progressivetauopathyafterrepetitiveheadinjury." JournalofNeuropathology&ExperimentalNeurology 68.7(2009):709-735.
4. Gregory,Hollin."Makingamurderer:mediarenderingsofbraininjuryandAaronHernandezasamedicalandsportingsubject." SocialScience&Medicine 244(2020):112598.
5. Price,Greg."NFLPlayerChargedWithMurder:WhoIsSuspectAaronHernandez?FormerNewEnglandPatriotAppearsInCourt,PleadsNotGuilty." IBTimes.com (2013).
6. Redding,RichardE."Thebrain-disordereddefendant:Neuroscienceandlegalinsanityinthetwenty-firstcentury." Am.ULRev. 56(2006):51.
7. New,JohnG."Ifyoucouldreadmymind:implicationsofneurologicalevidencefortwenty-firstcenturycriminaljurisprudence." TheJournaloflegalmedicine 29.2(2008):179-198.
THEQUESTION
Thepost-mortemfindingsinHernandez’braintellaneeriestoryandbringtolightabiggerquestion:wouldwestillhaveconsideredHernandezguiltyknowingtheextentofhisbraindamage?
THEDILEMMA
AaronHernandezwasunawarethathehadCTEduringhislifetime.Hislawyersanddoctorsdidnottakestepstodetermineifhisbraincapacitywasnormal.Notably,whilefunctionalneurosciencedoesnotcorrelatefullywithcognitiveneuroscience,abasicCT/MRIofHernandez’brainmayhaveraisedalarmsabouthismentalstatusandpromptedresearcherstoconductfurtherpsychologicaltesting.
WHENCANALEGALARGUMENTBEMADE?
Therearethreemajorcriminalsanctionsthatmayapplytothiscase:voluntarybehavior,mensrea,andtheinsanitydefense.
Undereachofthesecategories,adefendantcanarguethat,inparttohisneurologicdiagnosis,hecannotbearthesamenatureoflegalaccountabilityforhisactionsasanother,healthyhumanbeing.Commonwealthv.PirelaandStatev.Reidestablishedthe
precedentforthisdefenseincriminalcourt.