BRIEF COMMUNICATION On the Stand. Another Episode of Neuroscience and Law Discussion From Italy Michele Farisco & Carlo Petrini Received: 4 June 2013 / Accepted: 18 June 2013 # Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013 Abstract After three proceedings in which neuro- science was a relevant factor for the final verdict in Italian courts, for the first time a recent case puts in question the legal relevance of neuroscientific evidence. This decision deserves international attention in its underlining that the uncertainty still affecting neuroscien- tific knowledge can have a significant impact on the law. It urges the consideration of such uncertainty and the development of a shared management of it. Keywords Neuroscience . Law . Neurolaw The Fact After his arrest in flagrante delicto by the police, a school pediatrician from the North of Italy confessed to have harassed 6 different child, all less than 10 years old, with groping, rubbing and in one case attempting to rape. Moreover, he was found guilty of manufacturing child pornography: he has taken pictures of his abuse and filmed 3 incidents. The defense attorney required the consultation of the same experts already appointed in three previous Italian cases, in Trieste, Cremona and Como. These experts, after a functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) scan showing an acute brain pathology (chordoma of clivus) and referring to two scientific studies [1, 2], claimed that the pedophilia of the defendant was acquired as a consequence of the pressure on the hypothalamus by a tumor. According to the scientists, it is also possible that such a tumor caused orbitofrontal and cortical damage. As a result, the defense asked the defendant to be acquitted. Starting from the same evidence, the experts appointed by the prosecution came to a different con- clusion. According to them the tumor does not press the orbitofrontal area, which is in front of the tumor ’ s area: the chordoma presses the pons, the medio- inferior part of the brainstem with the pituitary gland. The prosecution’ s experts agreed with the defense’ s experts that the tumor had psychiatric consequences, like spastic crying and dysmetria, but they added that such consequences are not legally relevant for the case in question. They concluded that it is not possible to affirm that the defendant had a totally or partially compromised ability to understand the nature of the acts for which he is accused. The experts appointed by the prosecution added that the chordoma of clivus can cause an altered perception of risk, but neither the absence nor the diminishment of Neuroethics DOI 10.1007/s12152-013-9187-7 M. Farisco (*) Biogem Genetic Research Centre, Via Camporeale—Area PIP, 83031 Ariano Irpino, AV, Italy e-mail: michelefarisco@inwind.it C. Petrini Italian National Institute of Health, Via Giano della Bella 34, 00162 Rome, Italy