• JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
  • JoomlaWorks Simple Image Rotator
 
  Bookmark and Share
 
 
Doctoral Thesis
DOI
https://doi.org/10.11606/T.2.2017.tde-26022021-163102
Document
Author
Full name
João Daniel Rassi
Institute/School/College
Knowledge Area
Date of Defense
Published
São Paulo, 2017
Supervisor
Committee
Badaró, Gustavo Henrique Righi Ivahy (President)
Almeida, José Raul Gavião de
Malan, Diogo Rudge
Barros, Daniel Martins de
Gimenes, Marta Cristina Cury Saad
Title in Portuguese
Neurociência e prova no processo penal: admissibilidade e valoração
Keywords in Portuguese
Direito comparado -- Brasil -- Itália
Neurociências
Processo penal
Prova (Processo penal)
Abstract in Portuguese
A presente tese se propõe a analisar os critérios de admissibilidade e valoração das provas neurocientíficas, espécie da prova científica, no processo penal brasileiro, a partir da teoria dos sistemas de Niklas Luhmann. A teoria dos sistemas foi considera fundamental para legitimar o ingresso da prova neurocientífica no sistema do direito, porque permite que o juiz exerça sua função de gatekeeper no controle da boa ou má ciência ao seguir critérios que permitam incorporar o conhecimento científico, com a lógica própria do direito. A análise da experiência norteamericana e a evolução dos critérios de admissibilidade da prova científica foi fundamental, assim como o estudo do tratamento do tema no direito italiano, que previu em seu Código de Processo Penal dispositivo sobre a admissibilidade da prova atípica. A partir desta base teórica, procurou-se estabelecer o fundamento da admissibilidade e valoração da prova científica no direito processual penal brasileiro, considerando que com o avanço do próprio estudo da neurociência e da tecnologia, a utilização desta prova se torna cada vez mais possível.
Title in English
Neuroscience and evidence in criminal procedure: admissibility and valuation
Keywords in English
Admissibility of evidence
Neuroscientific evidence
Scientific evidence
Theory of systems
Value judgment of evidence
Abstract in English
This thesis analyzes the criteria for admissibility and value judgment of neuroscientific evidence, a type of scientific evidence, in Brazilian criminal cases, in light of the theory of systems of Niklas Luhmann. The theory of systems has been considered fundamental to legitimize the acceptance of neuroscientific evidence in the legal system, because it allows judges to exercise their gatekeeper function in controlling the admissibility of scientific evidence deemed good or bad, by following criteria that allow incorporating scientific knowledge by applying the logic of the law. The analysis of the American experience and the evolution of the criteria for the admissibility of scientific evidence have been of basic importance, as well as the treatment of the matter in Italian law, in which the Code of Criminal Procedure contains rules on the admissibility of atypical evidence. Starting from this theoretical base, I seek to establish the grounds for admissibility and value judgment of scientific evidence in Brazilian criminal law, considering that with the advancement of the study of neuroscience and of technology, the use of this type of evidence is becoming increasingly accepted.
 
WARNING - Viewing this document is conditioned on your acceptance of the following terms of use:
This document is only for private use for research and teaching activities. Reproduction for commercial use is forbidden. This rights cover the whole data about this document as well as its contents. Any uses or copies of this document in whole or in part must include the author's name.
4874632_Tese_Parcial.pdf (346.35 Kbytes)
There are withheld file due to requirements (data publishing, patents or rights).
Release Date
2023-02-26
Publishing Date
2021-05-05
 
WARNING: Learn what derived works are clicking here.
All rights of the thesis/dissertation are from the authors
CeTI-SC/STI
Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations of USP. Copyright © 2001-2022. All rights reserved.