Submitted by PPG Ci?ncias Criminais (ppgccrim@pucrs.br) on 2018-07-13T14:48:23Z
No. of bitstreams: 1
ANDREA - disserta??o final.pdf: 2091650 bytes, checksum: 7b81ae03a610f71f23246b337d637540 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Sheila Dias (sheila.dias@pucrs.br) on 2018-07-20T12:31:21Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1
ANDREA - disserta??o final.pdf: 2091650 bytes, checksum: 7b81ae03a610f71f23246b337d637540 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2018-07-20T12:40:19Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1
ANDREA - disserta??o final.pdf: 2091650 bytes, checksum: 7b81ae03a610f71f23246b337d637540 (MD5)
Previous issue date: 2018-03-26 / The present work has the objective of analyzing the neuroscientificevidence in the criminal
processalongwith its bioethicalimplications. Neuroethics and Neuroscience are also analyzed
in modern and historicalcontextualization in the company of theirphilosophicalramifications.
It discusses the dilemmasfaced for centuries by neurosciencetogetherwith the applicability of
neuro-sensoryevidence in the courts and with the development of privilege in common law.
After, here is discussed the question of actualevidence, the penal, scientific and
neuroscientific evidence along with their species : namelythe PET, the SPECT and thefMRI,
wherehere are discussed theirhistorical background and theiradmissibility as instruments to
detect lies.Subsequently, the topic of transcranialmagneticstimulation and
otherpsychiatrictechniques are addressed, takingintoaccount its bioethical, neuroethic and
legal aspects. Finding the presentdissertationwith the evaluation and reliability of the
neuroscientificevidence and it?s legal implications, showing in this final chapter the standards
of scientificevidence, the judge and the juryevaluation and the Bioethical implications brought withsuch evidence in the light of Fundamental Rights. / O presente trabalho tem o objetivo de analisar as provas neurocient?ficas no processo penal juntamente com as suas implica??es bio?ticas. Analisa-se, ainda, a contextualiza??o moderna e hist?rica da Neuro?tica e da Neuroci?ncia em companhia de suas ramifica??es filos?ficas e debatem-se os dilemas enfrentados pela Neuroci?ncia quanto ? aplicabilidade das provas neurocient?ficas nos tribunais e com o desenvolvimento do privilege na common law. Na sequ?ncia, discute-se a quest?o das provas propriamente ditas: as provas penais, cient?ficas e neurocient?ficas junto com as suas esp?cies, quais sejam a PET, a SPECT e a fMRI, em que se discorre sobre o hist?rico e sobre a admissibilidade desses instrumentos como detectores de mentiras. Posteriormente, ? tratado o tema da estimula??o magn?tica transcraniana e outras t?cnicas psiqui?tricas, levando em conta os seus aspectos bio?ticos, neuro?ticos e jur?dicos. Finalmente, aborda-se a valora??o e a confiabilidade das provas neurocient?ficas e suas implica??es jur?dicas, mostrando os standards das provas cient?ficas, a valora??o do juiz e do j?ri e as implica??es bio?ticas trazidas com tais evid?ncias ? luz dos direitos fundamentais.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:IBICT/oai:tede2.pucrs.br:tede/8217 |
| Date | 26 March 2018 |
| Creators | Eschiletti, Andrea Sartori |
| Contributors | Gauer, Gabriel Jos? Chitto |
| Publisher | Pontif?cia Universidade Cat?lica do Rio Grande do Sul, Programa de P?s-Gradua??o em Ci?ncias Criminais, PUCRS, Brasil, Escola de Direito |
| Source Sets | IBICT Brazilian ETDs |
| Language | Portuguese |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion, info:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesis |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Source | reponame:Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da PUC_RS, instname:Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul, instacron:PUC_RS |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
| Relation | 3263773896050529173, 500, 500, 500, 4512033976268881925, -7277407233034425144 |
Page generated in 0.0153 seconds