PREDICTABILITY AND REASONABLENESS OF DOUBT IN THE AGE OF AI-LAW AND NEUROLAW

Main Article Content

Rocco Neri

Abstract

Translating legal neuroscience with artificial intelligence: only in this way will there be a low percentage of wrongful convictions. For some time now, especially in common law jurisdictions, nanotechnology has not been such a remote idea for intervening in the brain activity of criminals. It is a valid reversible tool selective, precise and effective than psychopharmacological treatments. The technology, on which the neurodevices are based, provides a pulse that alerts the subject with such implanted tools,without inhibiting him from his free will and conscious control. The function is thus twofold: predictive and preventive-rehabilitative. The debated question is whether neurointervention should be only voluntary or also mandatory. Is neurointervention an essential component of sentencing or only one of its possible forms? An attempt will be made here to provide an opinion on how the use of nanotechnology applied to neurolaw is legitimate to the principles of substantive and procedural criminal law.

Article Details

Section
Articles