The application of group statistical data to violence risk assessment enjoys strong empirical support. Accordingly, this method has dominated expert testimony regarding future dangerousness at federal capital sentencing trials across the past 5 years. Standards for admissibility of violence risk assessment testimony in federal capital sentencing are being considered but remain ambiguous. Challenges to violence risk assessment testimony in these cases have broadly centered on issues of relevancy and reliability. Corollary questions include when such assessments are sufficiently individualized, whether group data can be generalized across American correctional settings, what scientific evidence supports a given methodology, and how information regarding special conditions of confinement is relevant to risk. Conceptual perspectives and scientific evidence regarding each of these issues are discussed.
