The forensic use of behavioral genetics in criminal proceedings: Case of the MAOA-L genotype

Ethical issues in the use of genetic predictions of aggressive behavior in the criminal justice system: a systematic review

Background

The use of genetic predictions of aggressive behavior in the criminal justice system remains a subject of ongoing debate. Since behavioral genetic evidence is often used in criminal defense arguments, it is crucial to critically examine the ethical challenges associated with its application.

Objective

This article seeks to identify and analyze these ethical concerns to ensure the responsible and equitable integration of genetic testing, when deemed necessary, into the judiciary system.

Methods

A systematic review was conducted using PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus, supplemented by manual searches of reference lists to identify additional relevant studies.

Results

The search yielded 1,023 publications, 12 of which met the inclusion criteria. Seven key ethical concerns were identified: the risks of discrimination, stigmatization, eugenic reasoning, deterministic interpretations, overestimation of dangerousness, privacy violations, and medicalization, along with the risks posed by limited scientific literacy among legal professionals.

Conclusion

The ethical challenges associated with genetic predictions of aggressive behavior underscore the need for a critical and multidisciplinary approach to their use in the criminal justice system. Collaboration among bioethicists, legal scholars, scientists, and communication experts is crucial to prevent misuse and reduce potential biases. Such an approach will help ensure that genetic insights are ethically applied, accurately interpreted, and used to promote justice rather than exacerbate systemic inequalities.

Shedding Light on Antisocial Behavior Through Genetically Informed Research

Antisocial behavior (ASB) refers to a set of behaviors that violate social norms and disregard the well-being and rights of others. In this review, we synthesize evidence from studies using genetically informed designs to investigate the genetic and environmental contributions to individual differences in ASB. We review evidence from studies using family data (twin and adoption studies) and measured DNA (candidate gene and genome-wide association studies) that have informed our understanding of ASB. We describe how genetically informative designs are especially suited to investigate the nature of environmental risk and the forms of gene-environment interplay. We also highlight clinical and legal implications, including how insights from genetically informed research can help inform prevention and intervention, and we discuss some challenges and opportunities within this field of research.

The use of neurobiological evidence in sentencing mitigation

Neurobiological evidence has grown increasingly relevant in U.S. criminal proceedings, particularly during sentencing. Neuroimaging, such as functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Positron Emission Tomography scans, may be introduced by defense counsel to demonstrate brain abnormalities to argue for more lenient sentencing. This practice is common for penalty mitigation in cases eligible for capital punishment. This article reviews the history of the use of neuroscience in criminal cases from the early 20th Century to present, noting pertinent legal and ethical considerations for the use of such evidence. The authors review important empirical research conducted in recent years regarding the use of neurobiological evidence in legal proceedings (such as mock-juror studies) and guidance from the federal sentencing guidelines and the American Bar Association. The discussion also notes relevant case law in which neuroimaging, behavioral genetics, or other neurobiological data were introduced in criminal proceedings, particularly precedent-setting U.S. Supreme Court cases.

Neurobiology of Aggression-Review of Recent Findings and Relationship with Alcohol and Trauma

Aggression can be conceptualized as any behavior, physical or verbal, that involves attacking another person or animal with the intent of causing harm, pain or injury. Because of its high prevalence worldwide, aggression has remained a central clinical and public safety issue. Aggression can be caused by several risk factors, including biological and psychological, such as genetics and mental health disorders, and socioeconomic such as education, employment, financial status, and neighborhood. Research over the past few decades has also proposed a link between alcohol consumption and aggressive behaviors. Alcohol consumption can escalate aggressive behavior in humans, often leading to domestic violence or serious crimes. Converging lines of evidence have also shown that trauma and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) could have a tremendous impact on behavior associated with both alcohol use problems and violence. However, although the link between trauma, alcohol, and aggression is well documented, the underlying neurobiological mechanisms and their impact on behavior have not been properly discussed. This article provides an overview of recent advances in understanding the translational neurobiological basis of aggression and its intricate links to alcoholism and trauma, focusing on behavior. It does so by shedding light from several perspectives, including in vivo imaging, genes, receptors, and neurotransmitters and their influence on human and animal behavior.

Forensically relevant challenging behaviors and the genetics domain

Impulsive and aggressive behaviors along with intellectual disabilities often manifest in the context of genetic disorders and are a persisting challenge to professionals in the forensic psychiatric and psychological setting. The following chapter comprises an overview of relevant factors in the gene-context-behavior interaction such as monoamine oxidase A activity and specific epileptic phenomena. It presents several examples of monogenetic disorders with behaviors from the aggression spectrum and summarizes emerging strategies for treatment and clinical management thereof. The final part focuses on challenges and future developments in this field with relevance for the judicial and forensic systems. It is concluded that the relationship between a genetic syndrome and forensically relevant and/or violent behaviors should typically be addressed within a multidisciplinary framework that also includes the application of modern genetic techniques.

Forensic Value of Genetic Variants Associated with Anti-Social Behavior

Insanity defense is sometimes invoked in criminal cases, and its demonstration is usually based on a multifactorial contribution of behavioural, clinical, and neurological elements. Neuroradiological evidence of structural alterations in cerebral areas that involve decision-making and moral reasoning is often accepted as a useful tool in these evaluations. On the other hand, the genetic predisposition to anti-social behavior is still controversial. In this paper, we describe two cases of violent crimes committed by young carriers of genetic variants associated with personality disorder; both the defendants claimed to be insane at the time of the crime. We discuss these cases and review the scientific literature regarding the relationship between legal incapacity/predisposition to criminal behavior and genetic mutations. In conclusion, despite some genetic variants being able to influence several cognitive processes (like moral judgement and impulse control), there is currently no evidence that carriers of these mutations are, per se, incapable of intentionally committing crimes.

State v. Yepez: Admissibility and Relevance of Behavioral Genetic Evidence in a Criminal Trial

The New Mexico Supreme Court recently considered whether a trial court had erred in excluding behavioral genetic evidence of a murder defendant's low-activity monoamine oxidase A (MAOA) gene, which the defendant argued had predisposed him-along with his history of childhood maltreatment-to "maladaptive or violent behavior." After an extensive analysis of the underlying science and its relevance to the case, the supreme court held unanimously that the trial judge had the discretion to exclude the MAOA evidence. The court's analysis provides insights into how other courts are likely to rule on the relevance of behavioral genetic evidence.

The neurobiology of human aggressive behavior: Neuroimaging, genetic, and neurochemical aspects

In modern societies, there is a strive to improve the quality of life related to risk of crimes which inevitably requires a better understanding of brain determinants and mediators of aggression. Neurobiology provides powerful tools to achieve this end. Pre-clinical and clinical studies show that changes in regional volumes, metabolism-function and connectivity within specific neural networks are related to aggression. Subregions of prefrontal cortex, insula, amygdala, basal ganglia and hippocampus play a major role within these circuits and have been consistently implicated in biology of aggression. Genetic variations in proteins regulating the synthesis, degradation, and transport of serotonin and dopamine as well as their signal transduction have been found to mediate behavioral variability observed in aggression. Gene-gene and gene-environment interactions represent additional important risk factors for aggressiveness. Considering the social burden of pathological forms of aggression, more basic and translational studies should be conducted to accelerate applications to clinical practice, justice courts, and policy making.

Future call for policy making to speed up interdisciplinarity between natural and social sciences and humanities in countries such as India

OBJECTIVES

Science is the erudite methodical systematic practises to study the structure and behaviour of natural objects and/or phenomena. It clearly unknot about the fact that science is a human (society) need based process that starts with social affairs, for example, need to exchange emotion and cognitive processes (psychology), feelings (literature), relation (sociology), money (economics) etc. Humanities are the use of approaches that are predominantly hypothetical but critical, and have a noteworthy historical component, and the methodical aspects distinguish it from the mainly experiential approaches of the science. The basic approaches in both remains the same that it needs a hypothesis, sound methodology, and interpretation of data. Human is the end user in both the cases. So, why only interdisciplinary research focused on the core subjects of science? For example, philosophy, deals with general and vital complications relating to matters including existence, knowledge, language, attitude, behaviour, values, ethics, reason, mind, peace and harmony in life which can be essentially a part of science (especially natural sciences and more particularly animals sciences such as zoology) or vice versa could be true. The current and future time will allow us to believe on such concept, is the main theme of the current article.

METHODS

Articles from all published sources are considered for answering the objective that why not concentrating to speed up interdisciplinarity. Few tables and figure are reproduced or redrawn as per the need. And numerical data are collected to present the current status of the interdisciplinarity and the need of the pace it requires.

RESULTS

It is noticed that number of research articles on interdisciplinarity in comparison to several core subject area in major databases including environmental biology are still negligible. Countries still need to inter-collaborate at interdisciplinary level for the development and benefit of human race. This needs to be done mainly at socio-economic, intercultural and scientific levels. Although numbers of steps are taken such as establishment of interdisciplinary institutes, introduction of interdisciplinary courses, interdisciplinary research and publication platforms in specialized dedicated journals, still concrete steps to introduce the course of interdisciplinarity at educational and professional level is wanting.

CONCLUSION

Therefore, policy on pace in interdisciplinarity across science and humanities is highly wanting especially in developing countries to fix several national and international issues. Present article deals with the current status and future prospective or policies required on interdisciplinarity.

"Reports of My Death Were Greatly Exaggerated": Behavior Genetics in the Postgenomic Era

Behavior genetics studies how genetic differences among people contribute to differences in their psychology and behavior. Here, I describe how the conclusions and methods of behavior genetics have evolved in the postgenomic era in which the human genome can be directly measured. First, I revisit the first law of behavioral genetics stating that everything is heritable, and I describe results from large-scale meta-analyses of twin data and new methods for estimating heritability using measured DNA. Second, I describe new methods in statistical genetics, including genome-wide association studies and polygenic score analyses. Third, I describe the next generation of work on gene × environment interaction, with a particular focus on how genetic influences vary across sociopolitical contexts and exogenous environments. Genomic technology has ushered in a golden age of new tools to address enduring questions about how genes and environments combine to create unique human lives.

Making Sense of Genetics: The Problem of Essentialism

"Psychological essentialism" refers to our tendency to view the natural world as emerging from the result of deep, hidden, and internal forces called "essences." People tend to believe that genes underlie a person's identity. People encounter information about genetics on a regular basis, as through media such as a New York Times piece "Infidelity Lurks in Your Genes" or a 23andMe commercial showing people acquiring new ethnic identities as the result of their genotyping. How do people make sense of new scientific findings that are inherently complex if they don't have years of specialized training and education at their disposal? Given the substantial overlap between a lay understanding of genetics and lay intuitions about essences, we argue that, when most people are thinking about genes, they are not really thinking about genes in the complex ways that good scientists are. Combating people's essentialist biases can be a formidable challenge. Although we have identified some promising results of trying to reduce people's genetic essentialist tendencies, there is still much to learn about how these essentialist biases can be countered. It is important to help people understand genetic information so they are able make well-informed decisions about their lives.

When Genetics Meets Religion: What Scientists and Religious Leaders Can Learn from Each Other

INTRODUCTION

To date scientists and religious leaders have not yet engaged in sustained face-to-face conversation concerning precision public health-related genetic technologies.

OBJECTIVES

To elucidate areas of commonality and divergence in scientists' and religious leaders' views of precision genetic technologies, and extract lessons conveyed by religious leaders to scientists, and scientists to religious leaders through participatory dialogue.

METHODS

Six 1.5-h dialogue sessions were held between 6 religious leaders, 8 University of Michigan scientists, and 3 additional public health/genetic counseling graduate students between October 2016 and September 2017, followed by an open conference at the Ann Arbor Public Library (n = 46). Statements were organized into thematically arranged duets comparing views of scientists and religious leaders. Duets were further ordered into interpretive levels. Comparative techniques were used to assure category agreement and face validity.

RESULTS

The analysis yielded 20 duets and 3 interpretive levels (expositional; implications and consequences; and integrative, bridging concepts). Scientists emphasized the value of epigenetic testing for health promotion, and cost saving for some forms of early genetic testing for adult-onset conditions. Religious leaders stressed care for an individual's willingness to change over technical fixes for behavioral conditions and, together with public participants, the importance of allocating money for societal needs. Both expressed caution on the use of nuclear transfer for mitochondrial DNA replacement and secondary uses of genetic data. Lay conference participants pointed towards a middle ground on the release of genetically edited mosquitoes for disease eradication.

DISCUSSION

Scientists stressed the value of professional guidance; religious leaders listened to family needs. Dialogues met four literature-based criteria for stakeholder involvement in deliberative processes.

CONCLUSION

While scientists and religious leaders differ in their points of emphasis and faith orientations (professional competency versus drawing on compassion), they can successfully collaborate in reaching mutual understanding and specific areas of agreement on precision genetic technologies relating to public health.

Mosaic trisomy 20 and mitigation in capital crimes sentencing: A review and case report

Trisomy 20 is a genetic abnormality in which individuals have an extra copy of chromosome 20. Complete trisomy 20 is rare and believed to be incompatible with life. A mosaic form of trisomy 20, in which only some cells or tissues contain the extra chromosome, is a relatively commonly encountered chromosomal abnormality found during prenatal testing, and c. 90% result in a normal phenotype. However, despite the absence of a consistent phenotype, certain findings have been reported across multiple cases of mosaic trisomy 20. These include an array of morphological findings, developmental delays, and learning disabilities. Beyond physical manifestations, a wide range of developmental and learning delays have also been reported. In this work, we provide an overview of the trisomy 20 literature and a case report of a young adult male with mosaic trisomy 20 who committed homicide. His developmental and life history, eventual diagnosis of mosaic trisomy 20, similarities and differences in his condition compared with prior research findings, and potentially new phenotypic findings associated with trisomy 20 that he manifested (childhood visual hallucinations, self-injury, polydactyly) are presented. Additionally, the potential role of this genetic diagnosis in his neuropsychiatric history and its successful application as a mitigating factor at his capital sentencing trial are described. We did not identify other similar cases during our search of major scientific and legal databases. As a backdrop, the use of genetics in criminal trials is on the rise, and courts are increasingly likely to accept behavioral genetics evidence; therefore, it is crucial that the legal system is well acquainted with the opportunities and limitations of these approaches.

Asymmetrical genetic attributions for prosocial versus antisocial behaviour

Genetic explanations of human behavior are increasingly common. While genetic attributions for behavior are often considered relevant for assessing blameworthiness, it has not yet been established whether judgments about blameworthiness can themselves impact genetic attributions. Across six studies, participants read about individuals engaging in prosocial or antisocial behavior and rated the extent to which they believed that genetics played a role in causing the behavior. Antisocial behavior was consistently rated as less genetically influenced than prosocial behavior. This was true regardless of whether genetic explanations were explicitly provided or refuted. Mediation analyses suggested that this asymmetry may stem from people’s motivating desire to hold wrongdoers responsible for their actions. These findings suggest that those who seek to study or make use of genetic explanations’ influence on evaluations of (e.g., antisocial) behavior should consider whether such explanations are accepted in the first place, given the possibility of motivated causal reasoning.

Biological Evidence Regarding Psychopathy Does Not Affect Mock Jury Sentencing

Research on the biological factors influencing criminal behavior is increasingly being introduced into court, necessitating research on how such evidence is perceived and influences decision makers. Research on how this evidence influences sentencing recommendations is inconclusive. In this study, we focus on biological evidence related to psychopathy, a construct commonly associated with criminal behavior. Approximately 800 community members were presented with a case vignette detailing an individual who is described as having a high level of psychopathic traits. Participants received either psychological information about psychopathy (i.e., no biological evidence), evidence the defendant had genetic risk factors for psychopathy, or written neuroimaging evidence the defendant had brain deficits associated with psychopathy. Participants then recommended a sentence. Overall, recommended sentence lengths did not differ between evidence conditions. These findings add to a growing body of research suggesting that biological evidence may not have as much of an influence on jurors as previously thought.

The charm of structural neuroimaging in insanity evaluations: guidelines to avoid misinterpretation of the findings

Despite the popularity of structural neuroimaging techniques in twenty-first-century research, its results have had limited translational impact in real-world settings, where inferences need to be made at the individual level. Structural neuroimaging methods are now introduced frequently to aid in assessing defendants for insanity in criminal forensic evaluations, with the aim of providing "convergence" of evidence on the mens rea of the defendant. This approach may provide pivotal support for judges' decisions. Although neuroimaging aims to reduce uncertainty and controversies in legal settings and to increase the objectivity of criminal rulings, the application of structural neuroimaging in forensic settings is hampered by cognitive biases in the evaluation of evidence that lead to misinterpretation of the imaging results. It is thus increasingly important to have clear guidelines on the correct ways to apply and interpret neuroimaging evidence. In the current paper, we review the literature concerning structural neuroimaging in court settings with the aim of identifying rules for its correct application and interpretation. These rules, which aim to decrease the risk of biases, focus on the importance of (i) descriptive diagnoses, (ii) anatomo-clinical correlation, (iii) brain plasticity and (iv) avoiding logical fallacies, such as reverse inference. In addition, through the analysis of real forensic cases, we describe errors frequently observed due to incorrect interpretations of imaging. Clear guidelines for both the correct circumstances for introducing neuroimaging and its eventual interpretation are defined.

A Genomically Informed Education System? Challenges for Behavioral Genetics

The exponential growth of genetic knowledge and precision medicine research raises hopes for improved prevention, diagnosis, and treatment options for children with behavioral and psychiatric conditions. Although well-intended, this prospect also raise the possibility-and concern-that behavioral, including psychiatric genetic data would be increasingly used-or misused-outside the clinical context, such as educational settings. Indeed, there are ongoing calls to endorse a "personalized education" model that would tailor educational interventions to children's behavioral and psychiatric genetic makeup. This article explores the justifications for, and prospects and pitfalls of such endeavors. It considers the scientific challenges and highlights the ethical, legal, and social issues that will likely arise should behavioral genetic data become available (or be perceived as such) and are routinely incorporated in student education records. These include: when to disclose students' behavioral and psychiatric genetic profile; whose genomic privacy is protected and by whom; and how students' genetic data may affect education-related decisions. I argue that the introduction of behavioral genetics in schools may overshadow the need to address underlying structural and environmental factors that increase the risk for psychiatric conditions of all students, and that the unregulated use of student behavioral genetic profiles may lead to unintended consequences that are detrimental for individuals, families and communities. Relevant stakeholders-from parents and students to health professionals, educators, and policy-makers-ought to consider these issues before we forge ahead with a genomically informed education system.

Nature, nurture, and capital punishment: How evidence of a genetic-environment interaction, future dangerousness, and deliberation affect sentencing decisions

Research has shown that the low-activity MAOA genotype in conjunction with a history of childhood maltreatment increases the likelihood of violent behaviors. This genetic-environment (G × E) interaction has been introduced as mitigation during the sentencing phase of capital trials, yet there is scant data on its effectiveness. This study addressed that issue. In a factorial design that varied mitigating evidence offered by the defense [environmental (i.e., childhood maltreatment), genetic, G × E, or none] and the likelihood of the defendant's future dangerousness (low or high), 600 mock jurors read sentencing phase evidence in a capital murder trial, rendered individual verdicts, and half deliberated as members of a jury to decide a sentence of death or life imprisonment. The G × E evidence had little mitigating effect on sentencing preferences: participants who received the G × E evidence were no less likely to sentence the defendant to death than those who received evidence of childhood maltreatment or a control group that received neither genetic nor maltreatment evidence. Participants with evidence of a G × E interaction were more likely to sentence the defendant to death when there was a high risk of future dangerousness than when there was a low risk. Sentencing preferences were more lenient after deliberation than before. We discuss limitations and future directions.