CASE BRIEF
PEOPLE v. PALMER

People v. Palmer is the trial of Alex Palmer, an ex-employee of a famous television producer, who is alleged to have murdered his former employer Jes Markson. The defendant is charged with one count of first degree murder.

The prosecution alleges that Alex was angry with Jes whom he believed took Alex’s script to develop a new successful television show. The prosecution further alleges that Alex confronted Jes the evening of Jes’s celebratory dinner party. After the confrontation, the prosecution alleges Alex waited until the guests left the party, entered Jes’s mansion, and shot Jes with an antique gun.

The defense will argue that Alex did not have an antique gun, was not in the neighborhood at the time the murder occurred, and that numerous other individuals might want to see Jes dead. The defense and prosecution will each present witnesses, expert testimony, and physical evidence to support their arguments.

The pretrial issue involves the admissibility of scientific evidence in a criminal trial . The question is whether the Memory Mapping test meets the Kelly test, which states scientific evidence is reliable if it has been generally accepted by the relevant scientific community. If the court determines the Memory Mapping test does not meet the Kelly standard, Exhibit C and all bracketed information cannot be used at trial.

The prosecution asserts that the Memory-Mapping Test is reliable and is generally accepted by the relevant scientific community. It is well established that the fMRI (Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging) detects brain activity and the Memory-Mapping Test looks for brain activity consistent with memory. In addition, many experts in journals and in testimony vouch for the reliability of this test. Like blood evidence and DNA, the Memory-Mapping Test is reliable enough to be admitted into court.

The defense claims that the Memory-Mapping Test is not reliable and has not been generally accepted by the relevant scientific community. While the existence of brain activity may be well established, it has not been proven that the presence of specific activity accurately reflects a subject’s memory of a particular crime. Experts and scientific journals are still split on the test. Like a polygraph or a speaker identification system, the Memory-Mapping Test is not suitable for use in court.