Lay Opinion Testimony and Expert Opinion Testimony Differentiated; Specific Knowledgee Expert Witness Opinion-Testimony; Proposed Amendments to Fed.R.Crim.Proc. 16 (a)(1)(G) and Fed.R.Evid. 701 and 702

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael H. Graham
Author(s):  
Maureen Spencer ◽  
John Spencer

The Concentrate Questions and Answers series offers the best preparation for tackling exam questions. Each book includes typical questions, bullet-pointed answer plans and suggested answers, author commentary and diagrams and flow charts. This chapter explores an area of evidence law dominated by expert witness evidence and the extent to which flawed testimony leads to miscarriages of justice. Expert evidence is now commonplace in criminal and civil trials, and the courts and Parliament have developed procedures to ensure that it is of high quality. These are an eclectic mix of common law and statute and their development reflects the importance of scientific expertise. It is necessary to be familiar with the differences between expert and non-expert opinion evidence and on when and in what circumstances both types are admissible and questions that can be asked of the expert whilst giving evidence. The approach depends on whether the question relates to civil or criminal trials


2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (4) ◽  
pp. 360-375
Author(s):  
KRZYSZTOF JÓŹWICKI

Evidence in the form of an expert opinion is usually of key importance for settling a pending case in any type of proceedings. In some cases, the role of the expert witness is closer to that of a judge rather than that of a witness, since a judge who does not have special knowledge often has to use evidence given by an expert to render a judgement. For this reason, issuing a false expert opinion results in a very high risk of delivering a wrong and unfair decision in a given case, which in turn has a negative impact on the social perception of the functioning of the justice system. In the Polish Criminal Code, criminal responsibility for issuing a false opinion is stipulated in Article 233 (4) and (4a) of the Penal Code. At the same time, despite a very large number of reports of suspicion that a crime has been committed by an expert witness, only a negligible number of investigations result in a bill of indictment and a conviction, which causes virtual impunity of perpetrators and has a negative impact on the functioning of criminal justice. Due to the diagnosed research gap in this area, the need to investigate and describe the phenomenon of issuing false opinions by expert witnesses, both in normative and criminological terms, on the basis of empirical research, has been clearly seen. The main objective of the research has been to characterise the phenomenon in question on many levels and to determine its real extent, its etiology and symptomatology. An additional aim of the research has been the verifi cation of research hypotheses and recognition of the normative sphere of the expert witness’s status, expert evidence, and principles of responsibility for issuing false opinions. The research fi ndings have resulted in proposals of solutions aimed both at limiting the phenomenon of issuing false opinions and more effective prosecution of perpetrators of crimes under Article 233 (4) of the Penal Code, which in turn may translate into more effi cient functioning of the entire justice system, as expert witnesses and their work are an extremely important aspect of thereof. The conducted research has fully confi rmed the research hypotheses and precisely indicated defective areas of expert evidence, and consequently the need to introduce immediate legislative changes. Some of the research conclusions and de lege ferenda postulates were implemented into the amended provisions of the Penal Code in 2016, which fully confi rms their legitimacy. Unfortunately, there is still no legal act of statutory rank which would comprehensively regulate the status of expert witnesses and expert evidence.


Author(s):  
Robert L. Bleyl

Whenever an expert witness uses the results of computer analyses as the basis for an expert opinion, that individual should be able to derive the formulas and duplicate the computer-produced results manually. In any questionable case, it may be wise to have the expert demonstrate this capability, especially at the discovery or deposition stage of his involvement, since a considerable length of time may be required in demonstrating this capability. If the expert is successful at this task, he probably has an adequate understanding of the notation, the assumptions, and the relevance of the variables used in the calculations and formulas and is less likely to go astray than the expert who lacks this capability. In my opinion, unless expert witnesses can demonstrate this capability, they are really no more experts in the subject than any high school student who is able to mathematically solve an equation or enter data into a computer program, but has no depth of knowledge about th


2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 78-82
Author(s):  
Z. V. Trifonova

The expert witness report plays a crucial part in any type of forensic investigation; forensic engineering and land surveying are no exception. This article focuses on relevance as a major criterion in the evaluation of a forensic expert’s report. The author identifies the main factors that shape the characteristics of this type of evidence that ensure the relevance of expert opinion in criminal, civil, or administrative proceedings


2003 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 189-190
Author(s):  
Sir Louis Blom-Cooper

Those who possess expertise or experience of a scientific or technical nature are often called to give evidence as a witness in a court or tribunal (in Scotland, he or she is known as a ‘skilled witness’). In so far as the expert witness expresses an opinion, that evidence is, strictly speaking, an exception to the hearsay rule. However, since the 16th century, the courts have admitted opinion evidence from anyone, not just a ‘professional’, who can assist the court on a scientific or technical matter which is an issue in the case and is beyond the knowledge of the court or tribunal. Frequently, the expert witness will be giving evidence as to fact as well as opinion. For example, the forensic pathologist who conducts a post-mortem examination will be able to give a factual description of the condition of the body and, at the same time, give an expert opinion on the cause of death. The forensic psychiatrist will similarly describe what has been determined about the patient on examination of his or her symptoms and express an opinion on the patient's mental health. There will be cases where the expert is supplied with factual data on which to express an expert opinion.


Author(s):  
Richard Glover

This chapter discusses the following: the general rule of common law that the opinion of a witness is inadmissible, and the exceptions for evidence of general reputation, the opinion of an expert witness within his area of expertise, and the opinion of any witness as a way of conveying facts within the competence of members of the public generally which do not call for specialized knowledge; principles of admissibility; competence; independence and objectivity; the weight of expert opinion evidence; the function of expert evidence; materials used by experts in forming their opinion; expert reports; common subjects of expert evidence; and the admissibility of non-expert opinion evidence. The developments since the Law Commission report on Expert Evidence (No. 325) are addressed, as are the impact of the Criminal Procedure Rules 2015 and the Criminal Practice Direction.


Author(s):  
Daria Zatonova

This article is dedicated to the search of the answer to the question of whether or not an expert witness carries civil legal (property) liability for providing flawed expert opinion that the court refuses to admit as the valid evidence in a case. An attempt is made to answer the question of whether compensation of the expert can be lowered; should the initial expert’s testimony be paid if the court requires second opinion; can the court refuse payment to the expert witness or a conclusion must be made that expert witnesses have immunity from property liability. Based on the results of analysis of arbitration court case law it is determined that in majority of the cases courts conclude that despite an ill-prepared expert testimony, compensation of the expert witness cannot be decreased or unpaid, while independent claim against the expert will not be satisfied. Such approach of the judicial system testifies that expert witnesses have de-facto immunity from civil liability, despite the fact that such immunity is not covered by the legislation. Moreover, there is a principle of general tort, according to which any damages, including those inflicted by an expert witness, are subject to compensation.


Author(s):  
Maureen Spencer ◽  
John Spencer

The Concentrate Questions and Answers series offers the best preparation for tackling exam questions. Each book includes typical questions, bullet-pointed answer plans and suggested answers, author commentary and diagrams and flow charts. This chapter explores an area of evidence law dominated by expert witness evidence and the extent to which flawed testimony leads to miscarriages of justice. Expert evidence is now commonplace in criminal and civil trials, and the courts and Parliament have developed procedures to ensure that it is of high quality. These are an eclectic mix of common law and statute and their development reflects the importance of scientific expertise. It is necessary to be familiar with the differences between expert and non-expert opinion evidence and on when and in what circumstances both types are admissible and questions that can be asked of the expert whilst giving evidence. The approach depends on whether the question relates to civil or criminal trials.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Nigel Eastman ◽  
Keith Rix

SUMMARY The expert witness practice of psychiatrists is under constant scrutiny by the courts and, in the UK, the General Medical Council, as well as within appraisal and revalidation as part of a doctor's overall practice. Regulation and appraisal of expert witness practice must address not only technical competence, including demonstration of a real understanding of the interface between medicine and law, but also ethical probity, including in respect of bias, which is the most challenging appraisal focus. In psychiatry, there is much room for ‘values expression’, and therefore bias, in the offering of expert opinion. This article first describes various legal and psychological definitions of bias; then addresses the sources and routes to expression of bias within expert witness practice, viewed legally, psychologically and neuroscientifically. Finally, it proposes ways in which inevitable bias can be minimised by the individual practitioner.


2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (6) ◽  
pp. 385-394 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith Rix ◽  
Nigel Eastman ◽  
Anthony Haycroft

SummaryActing as an expert psychiatric witness can be rewarding, but there are potential costs and pitfalls, such that the role should be undertaken only in an informed manner. With reference to the recent disciplinary cases of Dr Richard Pool and Dr Waney Squier, and a judgment of the Supreme Court, advice is offered to potential expert psychiatric witnesses. Suggestions are made as to training, the negotiation of instructions, the citation of published literature, the construction of expert opinion and how to ensure compliance with the ethical duties of the expert witness.LEARNING OBJECTIVES•Understand how psychiatric trainees can be prepared for assisting the courts and tribunals in the administration of justice•Appreciate the importance of engaging in a frank discussion with potential instructing solicitors, prior to instruction, regarding areas of expertise and working knowledge, providing a balanced interpretation of the psychiatric literature and giving reasoned opinions that withstand logical analysis•Know what processes can be used to enhance compliance with the ethical responsibilities of the expert psychiatric witness


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document