“How did law become so welcoming to excited delirium when medical and scientific communities continue to have serious reservations?”
In the Harvard Law Review, Nova Scholar Osagie Obasogie offers the first in-depth analysis of how diagnoses of “excited delirium” are often accepted as fact in legal cases involving deaths in police custody, despite being widely discredited and unrecognized by most medical bodies.
This article shows how courtroom rules—especially those governing expert testimony—can legitimize a flawed medical claim and help hide excessive force. These findings are essential for understanding how legal systems can undermine police accountability and complicate reform efforts.





