<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Transport Research International Documentation (TRID)</title>
    <link>https://trid.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://trid.trb.org/Record/RSS?s=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" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <description></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Copyright © 2026. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.</copyright>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <managingEditor>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</webMaster>
    
    <item>
      <title>Trial Aids in Highway Condemnation Cases</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1564748</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This discussion of the various objects and devices to supplement oral testimony and argument in eminent domain cases, reviews some of the problems of admissibility of evidence and suggests a course based on general rules. In the opening statement, the use of plans, drawings, maps or aerial photographs is almost mandatory for orientation of the court or jury. Jury view of the premises is the best of all trial aids. There are instances, however, when a jury view would not aid the trier of the fact. It is noted that rejected offers of exhibits are much more frequently grounded on the basic principles of competence, materiality and relevance, than on the object form of evidence. The counsel should put an exhibit in proper perspective even though it may be admitted. The use of aids in cross-examination is discussed and comments are made on the closing argument. The preparation and choice of exhibits are discussed. Several techniques are available for the addition of relevant details. These include: plastic overlays, scale models, diagrams, charts, graphs, maps, photography, renderings, and videotape.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Oct 2018 15:25:35 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1564748</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Missouri DWI Defense: The Law and Practice</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1472417</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Written for defense attorneys in Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) cases in the State of Missouri, provides understanding of biochemical and technological issues in DWI court cases in the State. Information is provided in key areas of DWI law in Missouri including: DWI investigation; sobriety testing; drug identification; chemical tests; blood alcohol calculation; pretrial investigation; pleas and agreements; trial procedures and more. Tools and applications for simplifying the DWI defense process are included on the bonus DVD, which contains NHTSA studies, articles, videos, DRE manuals, and example forms.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2018 12:00:14 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1472417</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Survey of DWI Courts</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1423449</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) Courts are a relatively new approach to combatting alcohol-impaired driving that borrows from the Drug Court Model and is directed at repeat DWI offenders and offenders having high blood alcohol concentrations at time of arrest. They attack the source of the problem by taking a comprehensive approach to changing behavior that includes accountability and long-term treatment. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) conducted a web-based survey of DWI Courts and DWI/Drug Courts (court programs that handle both DWI and drug offenders) in April/May 2015 in order to obtain detailed information on how DWI Courts were operating. NHTSA conducted the survey in collaboration with the National Center for DWI Courts, who alerted State Drug Court Coordinators to the survey, supported NHTSA webinars that described the survey, and provided NHTSA with contact information for the court programs. In addition, NHTSA contracted with Avar Consulting, Inc., to develop, test, and manage the data collection website. A total of 156 courts responded to the survey from a contact list of 473. Two indicated that they did not operate a DWI Court, and 21 did not meet the minimum number of DWI cases (5) for survey eligibility. Another 28 began the survey but stopped after completing a small number of questions. This left 105 that filled out the questionnaire from beginning to end. With some exceptions, most participants in the responding court programs were non-Hispanic, White, and English-speaking. Two-thirds of the responding programs indicated that half or more of their DWI participants in 2014 were employed full time. The reported number of DWI participants currently active in the programs ranged from fewer than 10 to more than 200. More than half the responding programs reported fewer than 30 DWI participants; the median number was 25. Most programs said that they had the capacity to serve all convicted DWI offenders eligible to participate in their programs, although one-third reported that was not the case. Where the number eligible exceeded capacity, 56 percent of the programs indicated that the difference was 15 or fewer slots while one-in-six said the difference was more than 75 slots. The vast majority of responding court programs said that treatment and supervision of program participants changes as the participant proceeds through the program, with programs having a minimum of three phases. The median reported amount of time that participants spent in the program before graduating was 17 months. The programs had a DWI Court team involved in decisions regarding the program for DWI participants and in monitoring their progress. Staffing meetings to discuss the participants were held weekly or else every other week. For treatment services, most responding programs referred DWI participants to treatment providers operating independently from the court. Available treatment services usually included counseling, support group services, relapse prevention, and intensive outpatient. Programs tended to integrate mental health and substance abuse treatment for DWI participants having co-occurring disorders. The programs typically drug/alcohol tested the participants multiple times a week during the initial phase of the program. Participants were likely to receive sanctions for positive drug tests and other forms of program non-compliance. The vast majority of programs also handed out rewards for achievements.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 26 Sep 2016 11:04:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1423449</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Service to the Mariner and the Public</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1422676</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This article discusses how Coast Guard investigating officers (IOs) are specifically trained and qualified to investigate alleged regulatory violations (such as negligence, incompetence, or drug use) that could affect a mariner’s ability to hold Coast Guard credentials. A suspension and revocation (S&R) proceeding is a legal mechanism by which the Coast Guard exercises authority over a mariner’s credentials and it subject to the Administrative Procedures Act. Based on their investigations, Coast Guard IOs presented the government’s case at administrative hearings to arguing for S&R of a mariner’s credential. Because of the administrative nature of the hearings, IOs often prepared and argued their cases without the assistance of a Coast Guard attorney. However, Coast Guard attorney involvement in S&R cases also benefits the public because credentialed mariners hold positions of great responsibility, including transporting hazardous cargo on the nation’s waterways. In cases where mariners use drugs, conduct negligent operations, or commit other violations, the Coast Guard must pursue S&R of the mariner’s credential be removed so that public health and well-being can be protected.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Sep 2016 14:45:07 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1422676</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Marine Casualty Subpoena Authority and Enforcement</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1422652</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Judicial enforcement of a subpoena can be a lengthy process requiring significant attention from the investigating officer (IO) and supporting Coast Guard and Department of Justice attorneys. However, if an item of evidence or an individual’s appearance is important enough to subpoena, then it is important enough to follow through with the enforcement process. Therefore, IOs must ensure their subpoenas are enforceable before they are served, and they must be prepared to take the necessary steps to enforce every subpoena they issue. Coast Guard investigating officers may contact the attorney advisor at the Investigations National Center of Expertise (INV-NCOE) if they have any questions about subpoenas, enforcement, or other legal matters related to marine casualty investigations. Therefore, so as not to waste any time, it’s essential to ensure:(1) every subpoena will be enforceable before issuance; (2) the IO has a general understanding of the enforcement process; (3) the IO is prepared to follow through with the enforcement process.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Sep 2016 14:45:01 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1422652</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Prescription Drug Abuse on the Water</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1422682</link>
      <description><![CDATA[An individual who holds a merchant mariner credential is held to a higher professional standard than other  nonlicensed  professions, and the individual is expected not to become engaged in any illicit activity that involved illegal drugs at any time, whether on a vessel or on shore leave. When a mariner has used dangerous drugs, Congress has required the Coast Guard to start suspension and revocation (S&R) proceedings against his or her merchant mariner credential (MMC). This statute stated that the MMC shall be revoked unless the mariner provides satisfactory proof that he or she is “cured” of any addiction or current use.  At an S&R hearing the Coast Guard must only prove the mariner held an MMC at the time of the drug use,  not that the drug use occurred while the mariner was working or “acting under the authority of the credential.”  More simply put, drugs used off the water are just actionable as drugs used on the water.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Sep 2016 14:44:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1422682</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Raising the Bar</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1422680</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The article described how the Suspension and Revocation National Center of Expertise (S&R NCOE) has raised the quality of preparation and presentation of formal proceedings in order to enure the mariner’s due process rights are protected. The S&R NCOE has also promoted fairness in the process by supporting efforts for both parties to be represented by professional counsel. Finally, the S&R NCOE’s efforts provided greater transparency, which enhanced the public’s  understanding  of  maritime  safety and security. Most importantly, the S&R NCOE has led to greater public confidence in the fairness of the process.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Sep 2016 14:44:42 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1422680</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Survey of DWI Courts</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1416829</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) Courts are a relatively new approach to combatting alcohol-impaired driving that borrows from the Drug Court Model and is directed at repeat DWI offenders and offenders having high blood alcohol contents (BACs) at time of arrest. These court programs attack the source of the problem by taking a comprehensive approach to changing behavior that includes accountability and long-term treatment. Whereas there is a substantial body of research demonstrating the effectiveness of Drug Courts, the same depth of research is lacking for DWI Courts. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) conducted a web-based survey of DWI Courts and DWI/Drug Courts (court programs that handle both DWI and drug offenders) in April through May 2015 in order to obtain detailed information on how DWI Courts were operating. NHTSA plans to use that information to help guide development of a program to evaluate DWI Courts.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jul 2016 09:52:32 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1416829</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Evaluation of the DUI Court Program in Maricopa County, Arizona</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1117455</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This is the final report of a project that evaluated the effectiveness of a DUI court program aimed at reducing felony DUI offenders’ subsequent alcohol-related traffic violations. The evaluation involved a descriptive and quantitative analysis of the program, and an impact evaluation of the program’s effect on the alcohol-related traffic law conviction recidivism of randomly assigned offenders to the DUI court program and the county’s standard probation program. The evaluation found that the DUI court concept as applied in Maricopa County was effective in reducing the recidivism of felony DUI offenders as measured by the time before a subsequent alcohol-related traffic conviction. The study also found that the DUI court program was more effective in reducing recidivism than the county’s standard probation program for the target group of offenders.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Oct 2011 12:53:10 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1117455</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>An Evaluation of Hardship Licensing for DWIs. Volume II: Effect on General and Special Deterrents</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/842138</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The research described in this report attempted to assess the effects of offering hardship licenses to drivers under suspension for drinking/driving offenses. The results of this research lead to the following conclusions: Court Operations - Changes in the law that increase the use of suspensions do not affect arrest or conviction rate. Any concern that the inability to offer hardship licenses will have an adverse affect upon enforcement or adjudication of drinking driving offenses appears unwarranted. Employment - Less than 2% of drivers suspended for drinking and driving show substantiated job loss. Since the rate of reported job loss for DWIs is the same for suspended and unsuspended drivers, any adverse effect on employment can be attributed to the drinking or the conviction rather than to the suspension. General Deterrence - Issuance of a hardship license does not appear to undermine the value of license suspension in deterring drivers in general from drinking-driving offenses. Drivers who lack knowledge as to the availability of hardship licenses are not additionally deterred by the information that such licenses are not available. Specific Deterrence - Issuance of hardship licenses to suspended drivers increases the amount of driving and hence the exposure to traffic violations and accidents, except in states requiring special insurance coverage, where it is the safer drivers who tend to seek hardship licenses. Neither full suspension nor hardship licensing appears to affect recidivism for DWI offenses.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 2007 07:57:05 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/842138</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>A Road Map for the Practice of Forensic Human Factors and Ergonomics</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/789994</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This chapter presents a road map for the practice of forensic human factors and ergonomics from initial contact with the attorney through trail testimony.  The intent is to list and discuss the general sequence of activities, grouped by phases that should be addressed while the professional is serving as a forensic expert witness and consultant.  The consultant role to the attorney often is as important as the expert witness role.  As a consultant, the human factors and ergonomics specialist may help the attorney in developing the case strategy as it relates to human involvement in the incident, as well as provide specific services such as developing and reviewing interrogatory questions and developing questions for examining the opposing human factors and ergonomics expert during deposition or trial.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Sep 2006 10:37:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/789994</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Memory for Conversation on Trial</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/790002</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This chapter describes how testimony regarding conversation is central to the vast majority of criminal and civil cases litigated in the courts.  The chapter illustrates, using a variety of case examples, that testimony regarding the content of conversation is central to a vast array of criminal and civil cases litigated in our judicial system.  Notwithstanding this centrality of memory for conversation, memory researchers have largely neglected basic research in this area and memory experts have rarely been asked to testify regarding the determinants of accuracy in memory for conversation.  Although basic memory research offers a rich source of hypotheses regarding the determinants of memory for conversation, it remains for future research to explore the ways in which the principles governing memory for conversation converge (or not) with those governing memory for other events.  Meanwhile, it is clear that memory for conversation can and does fail for most, if not all, for the same reason that memory for other events fails.  Thus, memory experts can be helpful to trial attorneys that are faced with potentially inaccurate witness testimony regarding the contents or context of conversation.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Sep 2006 10:37:49 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/790002</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Causation Issues in Workers’ Compensation</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/789998</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This chapter explains Workers’ Compensation (WC) legal issues that an ergonomics expert might help resolve.  Such cases involve cumulative trauma disorders, low back injuries, vibration disorders, and heat disorders.  An ergonomist that is asked to proved expert testimony in a WC case should understand which WC system applies because there are many WC systems and each system has its own unique features.  Of particular concern are different tests for causation – the issue most likely the focus of the ergonomist’s testimony.  Therefore, it is necessary to understand the specific legal requirements for an employee’s injury or disease in order to qualify it as having been caused by employment.  This chapter begins with a brief history of WC laws and a section is included to educate the ergonomist on the unique distinction made in WC systems between injury and disease.  A section discusses the common causation tests used in WC systems and following this are sections on ergonomic principles and the potential contributions of an ergonomics expert in WC cases.   A case involving a heat disorder is used to illustrate the principles and the role of the ergonomist in this kind of case.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Sep 2006 10:37:49 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/789998</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Presenting Behavioral Science Data as Legal Evidence: Legal Standards that the Ergonomics and Human Factors Expert Needs to Know</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/789990</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This chapter describes the evolution of the expert witness in litigation.  Unlike almost a century ago, when psychology was still young and the concept of expert witness was yet to be distilled by the courts, the social and behavioral sciences are not merely ready for the courts, they are also indispensable in helping the courts decide questions.  The remaining questions for the potential expert are whether he or she is qualified in an area and whether the expert and attorney are able to articulate the legal questions with the psychological answers.  The chapter notes that we should be careful in answering these questions so that we are not purveyors of “junk science,” but rather that we can bring data and evidence to court that serves justice and therefore betters society.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Sep 2006 10:37:46 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/789990</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Age and Functioning in the Legal System: Victims, Witnesses, and Jurors</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/790001</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This chapter describes how, as the population of elderly citizens continues to increase in the United States, a greater number of older adults will become victims of crimes and later report their experiences to police, attorneys, and juries, and perhaps even attempt to identify the perpetrators.  In fact, we already know that roughly 2 million elderly individuals become victims of crime each year.  Likewise, older Americans will become disproportionately represented among accident victims, witnesses in civil and criminal trials, and juries.  Therefore, aging has an impact on the legal system in myriad ways, from its role in generating situations subsequently litigated in the courts to the vagaries of memory among aging witnesses, to the role of age in juror judgments. In order to provide a context for understanding age-related declines in cognitive functioning, this chapter begins with a brief review of changes in the brain and their consequences for basic mechanisms of cognitive processing.  Subsequently, the chapter considers specific age-related deficits in cognitive functioning that:  (1) cause or contribute to incidents generating torts; (2) impair accuracy of testimony regarding these incidents; and (3) affect jurors’ processing of evidence and, thus, verdicts.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Sep 2006 10:37:40 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/790001</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>