The dichotomy of the expert witness

The expert on either side is either right, partially right, wrong, or wrong and dishonest. Even strongly opposed testimony is not evidence of dishonesty, although it is clear at least one expert is wrong. Some differences are the result of legitimate differences of opinion. However, the author has identified several categories of testimony that show dishonest intent. It is clear that the growth of financial incentives has increased the number of cases in which there are opposing experts. If some kind of corrective action is not taken, expert witnesses will no longer be an effective force in the legal system. A multidisciplinary testimony review board separate from the ethics function is clearly one answer to the problem.     

Notes on the psychologist expert witness

The psychologist who takes the witness stand to testify concerning the reliability of an eyewitness's testimony should assume the role of a watchdog, not a lapdog for the prosecution or an attack dog for the defense. The watchdog role is illustrated by a discussion of the decisions made by the author before accepting an invitation to testify as an expert.     

Immunity from suit of an expert witness extends to disciplinary procedures

This important decision provides that the immunity from suitof an expert witness in respect of evidence he gives in a courtof law extends to disciplinary procedures.     

试论我国司法鉴定人的民事责任及其完善

本文阐述了鉴定人的涵义和世界主要国家鉴定人承担民事责任的不同模式,分析了我国鉴定人承担民事责任的理论基础,最后结合我国在鉴定人制度方面存在的问题,提出了完善鉴定人制度的一些建议。     

试论我国司法鉴定人的民事责任及其完善

本文阐述了鉴定人的涵义和世界主要国家鉴定人承担民事责任的不同模式，分析了我国鉴定人承担民事责任的理论基础，最后结合我国在鉴定人制度方面存在的问题，提出了完善鉴定人制度的一些建议。     

Practical measures to reduce medical expert witness bias

To minimize bias by the testifying clinician, particularly in professional liability cases, six practical measures should be used: 1. testify for both the plaintiff and the defense in different cases; 2. assess the merits of the case separately from agreeing to testify; 3. insist on reviewing all the records thoroughly; 4. develop a solid medical posture for each case; 5. review the case in a balanced, critical manner; and, 6. articulate carefully the standard of care in his words before expressing it in deposition or at trial. The expert must stay within his role and duty as "expert witness" to remain effective.     

On the legality of cannabis; the responsibility of the expert witness.

The controversy concerning the taxonomic status of the genus Cannabis has now advanced to a stage where the forensic scientist has limitations to his testimony in identification of "marihuana" plant material in jurisdictions where the law defines "marihuana" as Cannabis sativa L. Whether the genus Cannabis is monotypic or polytypic is as yet uncertain, but recent taxonomic reviews weigh heavily toward the existence of three or more species within the genus. The taxonomists or forensic scientists cannot, therefore, positively state for fact that C. sativa is the only species existing within the genus Cannabis. The popular concept of "marihuana" is actually based on the chemical characteristics of the plant Cannabis, rather than on the taxonomic classification. This is evident in its inclusion as a drug or hallucinogenic substance under Federal and local statutes. It is therefore proposed that "marihuana" be redefined legally to include all members belonging to the genus, in jurisdictions where legal definition warrants such an act, or that these jurisdictions follow the format set forth by Federal rulings.     

医学会应做好准备 积极应对专家出席法庭

新修订的《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法》于2013年起开始实施。当事人对鉴定结论有异议,要求鉴定专家出席法庭作证已是大势所趋。医学会开展医疗事故(医疗损害)鉴定,专家签名和出席法庭的问题已经没有讨论的必要,如何采取措施积极应对是医学会要迫切考虑解决的问题。医学会、相关专家学者对这一问题进行过多次讨论,提出了多种建议、过度办法以及应对措施,但具体如何操作,还需要在实践中总结和探索。笔者以为,塑造和培养一支优秀的鉴定专家队伍,保证鉴定结论客观、科学、公正,写好鉴定书分析意见,使鉴定结论令当事人信服,是解决这一问题的关键。     

Sexual offenders in preventive detention: data concerning the inmates and expert witness practice

In the last decade, preventive detention-especially that relating to sexual offenders- has gained relevance for the German legal system. However, data are lacking concerning the inmates and the modus operandi of the psychiatric experts. Court orders and psychiatric statements of 114 offenders with orders of preventive detention were examined, 57 of whom were incarcerated because of sexual offences. Sexual offenders mostly show antisocial personality traits or even disorders, with a history of poly-trophic delinquency. In only four cases, the diagnosis of a sexual disorder was given. The analysis showed a high rate of psychiatric expert testimonies' lacking basic information, with incomplete assessment of sexual history. None of the experts used standardized prognostic instruments, meaning that most of the risk factors included in the Sexual Violence Risk-20 and the Static-99 were not considered. Further work needs to be done to improve the quality of psychiatric statements concerning sexual offenders.     

Educator of the court: the role of the expert witness in cases involving autism spectrum disorder

The role of the expert witness in legal contexts is to educate fact finders of the court who may have no background in the expert’s area. This role can be especially difficult for those who assist in cases involving individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). As expert assistance on ASD is crucial to ensuring just outcomes for individuals diagnosed with ASD, knowledge on how expert witnesses perceive and approach their roles, and what factors may influence these perceptions, is essential. This qualitative research utilizes semi-structured interviews with a sample of expert witnesses in cases involving ASD, analyzed using a grounded-theory constant-comparative analytic approach. Data reveal that experts appear to view their roles in court as reconstructionists, educators, myth-dispellers, and most of all, communicators, actively using their testimony to fill these roles in cases. These results also allow for the development of a model that illustrates two areas that coalesce to affect how experts view their roles in court: (1) personal experiences of experts in cases in which they have been involved; and (2) influences outside experts’ personal experiences, such as their general opinions or observations regarding ASD and its relationship to the criminal justice system.     

国外专家证人制度对我国医疗损害鉴定体制改革的启示

司法鉴定过程中专家证人制度是其灵魂。就国外来说,大陆法系和英美法系对专家证人制度的规定大相径庭。本文从概念定位、选任和出庭制度等方面比较大陆法系和英美法系在专家证人方面的规定,进而提出完善我国专家证人制度的若干建议。     

Ten years after Daubert: the status of the states

This paper examines how many of the states have changed their respective scientific-evidence admissibility standards under the influence of the United States Supreme Court's 1993 Daubert decision. The authors offer a definition of what constitutes a Daubert state, and using this definition classify the fifty states into three categories. These are: Frye states (15 states, 10 with codified evidence rules patterned after the Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE)); Daubert states (26 states, 24 with FRE-based rules), and non-Frye/non-Daubert states (9 states, 7 with FRE-based rules). The authors discuss how the reliability requirement varies among the non-Frye states, and examine how particular types of evidence have fared in the Daubert era. Finally, the authors offer some predictions for the scientific evidence trends of the states.