References
- R. v. Nikolovski. 1996, 111 C.C.C. (3d) 403, at 409.
- Demjanjuk v. Israel, Crim. App. No. 347/88, at 41.
- Fabricant MC. 2022. Junk Science and the American criminal justice system. Brooklyn, NY: Akashic Books.
- Kotecha B. The International Criminal Court’s selectivity and procedural justice. J Int Criminal Justice. 2020;18(1):107–139.
- McDermott Y, Koenig A, Murray D. Open source information’s blind spot: Human and machine bias in international criminal investigations. J Int Criminal Justice. 2021;19(1):85–105.
- White Burgess Langille Inman v. Abbott and Haliburton Co., 2015 SCC 23.
- Montibeller G, von Winterfeldt D. Cognitive and motivational biases in decision and risk analysis. Risk Anal. 2015;35(7):1230–1251.
- Dror IE. Cognitive and human factors in expert decision making: six fallacies and the eight sources of bias. Anal Chem. 2020;92(12):7998–8004.
- Cooper GS, Meterko V. Cognitive bias research in forensic science: a systematic review. Forensic Sci Int. 2019;297:35–46.
- Porter EG. Taking images seriously. Columbia Law Rev. 2018;114:1687–1782.
- Feigenson N, Sherwin RK. Thinking beyond the shown: Implicit inferences in evidence and argument. Law Probab Risk. 2007;6(1–4):295–310.
- Sherwin RK, Feigenson N, Spiesel C. What is visual knowledge, and what is it good for? Potential ethnographic lessons from the field of legal practice. Visual Anthropol. 2007;20(2–3):143–178.
- Feigenson N. Visual evidence. Psychon Bull Rev. 2010;17(2):149–154.
- Newman E, Feigenson N. The truthiness of visual evidence. Jury Expert. 2013;25(5):9–14.
- Fiedler BS. Are your eyes deceiving you?: The evidentiary crisis regarding the admissibility of computer generated evidence. New York Law School Law Rev. 2003;48(1–2):295–322.
- Porter EG. Imagining law: visual thinking across the law school curriculum. J Legal Educ. 2018;68(1):8–14.
- Mnookin JL. Semi-legibility and visual evidence: an initial exploration. Law Culture Humanities. 2014;10(1):43–65.
- Agosto E, Ajmar A, Boccardo P, et al. Crime scene reconstruction using a fully geomatic approach. Sensors (Basel). 2008;8(10):6280–6302.
- Sheppard K, Cassella JP, Fieldhouse S. A comparative study of photogrammetric methods using panoramic photography in a forensic context. Forensic Sci Int. 2017;273:29–38.
- Schofield D, Fowle K. Technology corner – visualizing forensic data: Evidence (Part 1). J Digital Forensics Secur Law. 2013;8(1):73–90.
- Powell CE. Computer generated visual evidence: does daubert make a difference? Georgia State Univ Law Rev. 1996;12(2):577–600.