Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Case study of spinal cord injury
Clinical case of spinal cord injuries
Case study of spinal cord injury
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Case study of spinal cord injury
I saw a documentary about a case where a pregnant woman was left mute and partially paralyzed after she was brutally attacked and left for dead in her store. Despite the extensive amount of brain damage she received, she was still able to deliver a healthy baby boy despite being in a coma. After she woke up, and even though she was unable to talk, detectives still questioned her and followed up the interview with a photo lineup. It is proven that eyewitness accounts are highly unreliable, especially if the victim was very stressed during the crime. For the detectives to use any information given to them during the interview in order to make an arrest, knowing the amount of damage done to her cerebrum, the part of the brain that controls memory, judgement, and language, is an injustice …show more content…
After seeing how this ordeal has affected the families of both the victim and the wrongfully convicted individual, I wanted to research a way to regenerate nerves in the central nervous system (CNS), the brain and spinal cord, after they have been damaged so those with a traumatic injury are able to once again have a fully, functional nervous system. I initially wanted to focus on the nerves located in the spinal cord so those who are paralyzed are not wheelchair bound for the rest of their lives. I soon realized if nerve pathways in the brain could be restored, then the same process could be applied to nerves in the spine. The reason why prosthetics are able to work is due to the fact that neural pathways in our peripheral nervous system (PNS), nerves that connect our limbs to the CNS, are able to regenerate on their own. These neurons are covered with Schwann cells that facilitate the regeneration of the axon, the part of the cell responsible for transmitting signals. Certain proteins located in the CNS, astrocytes and
“Eyewitness Identification: A Policy Review.” The Justice Project, Iowa State University. Web. 22 April 2014.
In chapter 6 of Unfair, Adam Benforado addresses the issues regarding human being’s poor memory and our justice systems outrageous reliability on eye witness testimony. Benforado believes that our real memories are severely obstructed by the human brains limit in perception. Our brains are not able to recall every moment of every day because there is simply no way to process everything we encounter in a day. Although most science supports the idea that our memories are unreliable and biased, most of us humans believe we have good and accurate memory. We also expect other to be able to perform basic memory task with accuracy and consistency, which is why for years, the United States so desperately depended on eye witness testimony to get a conviction. This desperation over the years has left hundreds, possibility thousands of innocent citizens paying for a crime they did not commit. According to the reading, of the first 250 exonerations in the United States, 190 of them happen to have involved mistaken identification’s
Until recently there was virtually nothing doctors could do for the 500,000 Americans who have strokes each year, the 500,000 to 750,000 who experience severe head injury, or the 10,000 people who are paralyzed after spinal cord damage (3). However, that is about to change. Researchers now think it may be possible to replace destroyed brain cells with new ones to give victims of stroke and brain injury a chance to relearn how to control their body, form new thinking processes, and regain emotions. After demolishing the long-standing myth that brain cells cannot regenerate or proliferate, scientists are developing ways to stimulate cells to do just that. Although stroke, head injury, and paralysis are three of the most devastating things that can happen to anyone, scientists have recently learned that the damage they cause is not preordained. It takes place over minutes, hours, and days, giving them a precious opportunity to develop treatments to halt much of the damage. Most of the new remedies are not yet available, but an explosion of research in the last five to ten years has convinced scientists that some of them will work (8).
For example, when the victims want to remember something, or someone, strongly and with high confidence, the witness can still be wrong. The eyewitness is given all the photos of the suspects laid out to identify the person they remember committing the crime. Also the eyewitness is asked to identify each photo whether is the culprit or not. Prosecutors should look over the cases before relying on eyewitness. Prosecutors should not depend on eyewitness testimony because that will lead to wrongful convictions. The wrongful convictions span the criminal justice system from investigation and arrest to prosecution and trail(Ferrero). False conviction makes the justice system stronger and arresting innocent is wrong. And picking out person similar to the murder. Not catching the real suspect might cause the public risky. Public safety be in risk."Wrongful conviction is gravest violation of personal liberty and also poses severe public safety risks, as the real perpetrator could remain on the street," an innocence Project news release said. The real suspect might kill many people or if the eyewitness might be in risk. If the victim is still life might be kill again. Lying about someone is not good thing might have miserable life in their future.
This is exactly what happened to the wife of Bennett Barbour, when Bennett was 22-years-old he was accused of the rape of two women that were sexually assaulted at gunpoint on February 7, 1978. The victims described their attacker as a man who was 5’6” tall and 145 pounds. Within a week one of the victims picked Bennett out of a photo array and two live lineups. All three times the victim chose Bennett. At the time, Bennett was 115 pounds and he had suffered from a brittle-bone disease and had a pin in his elbow which would have made it difficult for him to commit the rape. There were hair and semen found at the scene that didn’t belong to Bennett, which proved his innocence, yet he was still arrested for the crime. Unfortunately, the eyewitness testimony trumped all the evidence that supported the fact that he was not the attacker. Regardless of all the evidence and the alibi he had provided he was convicted of the crime and sentenced to 10 years in prisons. However, Bennett served 35 years in prison and was not released from prison until May 24, 2012, when he was cleared of the rape.
In the last forty years, there has been a shift in courtroom proceedings. Lawyers are not only focusing their evidence on the scientific aspects of an event, but also on those who may have witnessed the actual event as well. Recently, the number of eyewitness appearances in the courtroom has increased, making statements about either a crime or an event that occurred in their presence. But how does the courtroom decide who is a legitimate witness to an event? Too often, age, race, education, and socio-economics play a major role in this decision. Here, we will discuss the age aspect of this problem in terms of child eyewitness testimony and it's implications in the courtroom.
Memory is not reliable; memory can be altered and adjusted. Memory is stored in the brain just like files stored in a cabinet, you store it, save it and then later on retrieve and sometimes even alter and return it. In doing so that changes the original data that was first stored. Over time memory fades and becomes distorted, trauma and other events in life can cause the way we store memory to become faulty. So when focusing on eyewitnesses, sometimes our memory will not relay correct information due to different cues, questioning, and trauma and so forth, which makes eyewitness even harder to rely on. Yet it is still applied in the criminal justice system.
Scientists would be able to grow spinal cells from pluripotent stem cells. These cells could possibly repair spinal cord damage. Those afflicted by paralysis, such as Christopher Reeve, could possibly move again. Stem cells could also be used to grow nerve cells, possibly combating Parkinson’s disease or Alzheimer’s. While it will be many years before scientists may actually be able to find a way to combat these diseases, there is a great promise in stem cells.
From the moment an innocent individual enters the criminal justice system they are pressured by law enforcement whose main objective is to obtain a conviction. Some police interrogation tactics have been characterized as explicit violations of the suspect’s right to due process (Campbell and Denov 2004). However, this is just the beginning. Additional forms of suffering under police custody include assaults,
There has been considerable debate worldwide, regarding the accuracy of eyewitness testimony in the criminal justice system. Particularly, arguments have surrounded wrongful convictions that have resulted from incorrect eyewitness evidence (Areh, 2011; Howitt, 2012; Nelson, Laney, Bowman-Fowler, Knowles, Davis & Loftus, 2011). The purpose of this essay is to consider psychological research about the accuracy of eyewitness testimony and its placement in the criminal justice system. Firstly, this essay will define how eyewitnesses and their testimonies are used within the criminal justice system and the current debate surrounding its usage. Secondly, the impact of post-identification feedback will be used to show the affect on the confidence of a witness. Thirdly, studies around gender related differences will show how a witnesses gender can affect memory recall and accuracy. Fourthly, empirical studies will be used to highlight how a psychological experience called change blindness can cause mistakes in eyewitness identification. Finally, the effect of cross-examination will be used to explore the impact on eyewitness accuracy. It will be argued, that eyewitness testimony is not accurate and highly subjective, therefore, the criminal justice system must reduce the impact that eyewitness testimony is allowed to have. Developing better policies and procedures to avoid wrongful convictions by misled judges and jury members can do this.
Sharp, J., Frame, J., Siegenthaler, M., Nistor, G., Keirstead, H.S. (2010). Human Embryonic Stem Cell-Derived Oligodendrocyte Progenitor Cell Transplants Improve Recovery after Cervical Spinal Cord Injury: Stem Cells, 28, 152 – 163.
Cognitive Interviewing is a form of interviewing which was originally developed to be utilized with adult witnesses. This technique involves mentally reconstructing the event, recalling the event in different sequences, and describing the event from various perspectives to get as many details about the event as possible (Cronch et al, 2006). It has been found to increase the information adults give in an interview by 35-45 percent (Milne et al, 2013). A couple of studies suggested that it could be difficult for children to recall so many details about the event in a Cognitive interview and that it seemed to work better with older children (Cronch et al, 2006; Saywitz et al, 1992). The level of a child’s cognition is not just an issue for Forensic
The Self-Administered Interview (SAI) is a revolutionary investigative tool developed by a small team consisting of 'Dr Fiona Gabbert (Abertay University, Scotland), Dr Lorraine Hope (Portsmouth University, England) and Professor Ron Fisher (Florida International University, USA)' (“The SAI”, n.d.). The SAI has been developed to preserve and protect the memories of eye witnesses to incidents or critical events. Eyewitness accounts are critical to police investigations and may play a key role in the conviction of a potential criminal. Inaccurate eyewitness accounts are said to be the cause of many false imprisonments, which is why it is so crucial that we protect the memory of a witness. If a case goes to trial “one can reasonably assume that
(Case of Lilly Allen v Alex gray case no: T20150821) the victim was so traumatised she gave her evidence behind a curtain at the witness box. The court room may also be cleared so that evidence may be given privately. Under s.116: a fearful witnesses statement may be read out to the court. Since Maisie is a child she may find court intimidating, so under the special measures guidelines, the barristers and judge may remove their gowns and wigs. The court wouid be allowing ex in chief before trial and that video recording wouid be shown in court. Under section 32, the judge must warn the jury not to be prejudiced against the defendant due to the special measures put in place. She may be scared and refuse to give evidence, section 116 of the criminal justice act has provision of support for the victims support. The human rights act 1998 states that public authorities to act in a way that are in accordance with the victims , human rights. There is also witness anonymity, under common law, the court will control proceedings so that the witness remains anonymous, however in the case of R v Davis (2008) H of L said that the trial was unfair because the witness gave evidence
The two largest contributors to wrongful convictions are eyewitness misidentification and improper forensic testing; the human brain is not like a tape recorder, which means we cannot record information with undoubted accuracy nor can we easily repeat such information like a tape that has been rewound and many of the so-called sciences involved in forensic tests are unfounded and untested. The justice system relies heavily on eyewitness testimony, especially in the absence of other evidence, but several studies and cases have shown that this practice is frequently unreliable, with 77% of DNA exoneration cases involving eyewitness misidentification (“Eyewitness Misidentification”), and many juries are presented forensic evidence as scientific fact, when in reality nobody knows how accurate these tests ...