Pathological risk-propensity typifies Mafia members' cognitive profile.

Since the recruitment process, Italian Mafias impose on their members a strict code of conduct. These rigid rules regulate their private and public behavior, implying a total adhesion to the group's values. Such juridical and social aspects substantially distinguish organized crime (OC) from ordinary crime. It is still unknown whether these two categories of offenders also show distinctive cognitive traits. Here we investigated the frontal lobe cognitive functions of 50 OC prisoners from the Mafia and 50 non-OC prisoners based on the performance of 50 non-prisoner controls. We found that OC members were more likely to show pathological risk-propensity than non-OC prisoners. We interpret this finding as the result of the internal dynamics of Mafia groups. OC is a worldwide threat, and the identification of cognitive traits behind criminal behavior will help in devising focused prevention policies.

Shared genetic data and the rights of involved people

Los autores repasan las dos posturas principales hacia la genética: el excepcionalísimo y la infravaloración. Primero presentan la materia desde un punto de vista científico y luego verifican como funcionan en realidad esas dos posturas en los diferentes casos en la que la genética humana encuentra aplicaciones relevantes, tratando los temas que surgen de las características únicas de la información genética que es compartida entre todo el bio-grupo. A continuación se trata y discute algunos casos judiciales relacionados con conflictos que surgen del almacenamiento de la información genética en depósitos, cualquiera que sea los objetos o razones. Luego se analiza desde el punto de vista del derecho penal, en función de las nuevas y posibles implicaciones de las huellas de ADN en investigaciones criminales. Finalmente, se presentan las ideas generales para oponerse a las perspectivas del excepcionalismo o la infravaloración y se presenta la verdadera razón para crear nuevas reglas

The authors examine the two main attitudes toward genetic. Exceptionalism and Undervaluation. They firstly pose the basis of the matter from the scientific point of view and then verify how these two attitudes really work in the different fields where human genetics finds relevant applications, dealing with the questions arising from the unique characteristics of genetic data that is shared among the whole bio-group. Then some judicial cases related to the conflicts arising when genetic data are stored in repositories, whatever the aims and reasons. Are presented and discussed. The matter is then considered from the criminal law perspective, in the light of the new possible implications of DNA fingerprinting in criminal investigations. Finally, some general considerations on opposing Exceptionalism/Undervaluation viewpoints and the real reason for making up new rules are presented

Shared genetic data and the rights of involved people.

The authors examine the two main attitudes toward genetics: Exceptionalism and Undervaluation. They firstly pose the basis of the matter from the scientific point of view and then verify how these two attitudes really work in the different fields where human genetics finds relevant applications, dealing with the questions arising from the unique characteristics of genetic data that is shared among the whole bio-group. Then some judicial cases related to the conflicts arising when genetic data are stored in repositories, whatever the aims and reasons, are presented and discussed. The matter is then considered from the criminal law perspective, in the light of the new possible implications of DNA fingerprinting in criminal investigations. Finally, some general considerations on opposing Exceptionalism/Undervaluation viewpoints and the real reason for making up new rules are presented.

Science and the courts: a fruitful experiment of interaction.

The authors report on the European Seminar on Hot Genetic Issues and the Courts, held in Pavia (I), September 2005. They examine the new possible concerns regarding bio-sciences practical applications and the stronger need for a closer interaction between jurists, judges and scientists. They highlight the importance of the ENLSC's networking experience in judicial education and the originality of its approach.

Science and the Courts: a fruitful experiment of interaction / Science and the Courts: a fruitful experiment of interaction

Los autores presentan el informe llevado a cabo en el seminario “European Seminar on Hot Genetic Issues and the Courts” que tuvo lugar en Pavia en septiembre de 2005. Estudian los posibles problemas de aplicación práctica de la biociencia y la fuerte necesidad de una interacción más cercana entre juristas y científicos. Acentúan la importancia de la experiencia de contactos de la ENLSC en la educación judicial y la originalidad de su planteamiento

The authors report on the European Seminar on Hot Genetic Issues and the Courts, held in Pavia (I), September 2005. They examine the new possible concerns regarding bio-sciences practical applications and the stronger need for a closer interaction between jurists, judges and scientists. They highlight the importance of the ENLSC´s net working experience in judicial education and the originality of its approach

The need for scientists and judges to work together: regarding a new European network.

Is it always true to say that science is, by definition, universal whilst laws and the courts which apply them are a classic state and national expression? Yes and no. In recent years a new scenario has opened all over the world. Courts intervene more and more in disputes on matters related to scientific procedures in the biological field. In doing so the courts' decisions are affected by scientific issues and ways of reasoning and, on the other hand, affect the scientific field and its way of reasoning. While the old matter of bioethics was still alive and while judges were improving their skill in dealing with hard matters, like refusal of medical treatments, abortion, euthanasia et cetera, a new challenge appeared on the horizon, the challenge of biological sciences, and especially of the most troubled field of human genetics. A completely new awareness is developing among judges that they belong to an international judiciary community, as informal as it is real. Such a community is, even at an embryonic stage, sufficiently universal to be able to come together with the international scientific community. The authors maintain we are in urgent need for new interaction between judges and scientists and of new international means in the light of such cooperation. Judges and jurists need to become better acquainted with scientific questions and learn to exchange ideas with scientists. They also need to set themselves against the latters' conceptual systems and be willing to put their own up for discussion. A European Network for Life Sciences, Health and the Courts is taking its first steps, and judges and scientists are working side by side to tackle the new challenges. The provisional headquarters are located at the University of Pavia (I), Laboratorio di Biologia dello Sviluppo and Collegio Ghislieri (e-mail: enlsc@unipv.it). ENLSC activity is inspired by the following idea: to be against science is as much antiscientific as to be acritically pro-science.