ABSTRACT
This chapter examines how different criminal justice systems treat vulnerable defendants through a comparative analysis of empirical research on neuroscientific evidence in criminal cases. The discussion focuses on five systematic studies: one carried out in the United States (U.S.) and the others conducted in five additional countries – Canada, England and Wales, the Netherlands, and Slovenia. This international approach gives a new lens to defendant vulnerability by deciphering the techniques and hurdles different criminal justice systems face and the solutions they seek. It also provides a vehicle for framing the picture of “vulnerability” in light of the term's definitional vagueness. Whether neuroscience can come to the rescue remains to be seen, yet such a proposition makes sense morally, legally, and pragmatically.
