Naked Statistical Evidence and the Futility of Lawful Conduct. Christian Dahlman from Lund University in Sweden (with guest host Alex Nunn) offers an explanation of the so-called proof paradoxes based on incentives and causal direction.

Towards a Continuous Burden of Proof. Mark Spottswood considers replacing our traditional, dichotomous burden of proof based on thresholds with a continuous one that would award greater damages with greater factfinder certainty.

Going Ballistic. Binyamin Blum from the University of California at Hastings discusses the origins of ballistics identification under British colonialism in Egypt during the 1920s.

Experts in the Jury Room. Kristin Liska (Stanford) considers how the legal system should handle expert jurors who introduce untested specialized knowledge into the deliberation room.

Brain-Computer Interfaces and the Law. Jessica Haushalter (Vanderbilt) discusses her student note on brain scanning technology and the challenges it faces in the courtroom.

Problems with Juror Bias in Viewing Body-Camera Video Evidence. Morgan Birck (Michigan) talks about her student note arguing why police body camera footage is not living up to its potential in the courtroom.

Expanding Pena-Rodriguez to Protect Criminal Defendants from Explicit Gender Animus. Katie Hicks (University of Arkansas School of Law) joins the podcast to advocate in favor of expanding Pena-Rodriguez to combat gender-based animus.

Why Open Science Matters to Factfinding in Courts. Jason Chin from the University of Queensland (Australia)

discusses how the open science movement in the scientific community could help address the expert reliability problem in law.

A Right to Prove Innocence After Pleading Guilty. Colin Miller from the University of South Carolina argues that defendants who plead guilty should retain a right to prove their innocence under certain cirumstances.

Fillers, Contextual Bias, and Forensic Comparisons. Adele Quigley-McBride from Iowa State University discusses how the use of fillers might help neutralize the biasing effect that contextual information has on forensic comparisons.