Police psychology: The influence of Daubert and its progeny

In the current legal atmosphere, any practicing professionals, including police psychologists, may expect to have their decisions challenged in court. If such a challenge is not met, it may have a disastrous financial and reputational impact for both the psychologist (and other expert consultant) and the employer or contractor by whom the psychologist has been retained. The rules for expert witness qualification throughout the nation have been very strongly effected by the introduction of the Federal Rules of Evidence in 1975 and subsequent case law, particularly theDaubert, Joiner, andKumho Tire Supreme Court decisions. This article examines the history of the development of theDaubert Standard and proposes principles for potential expert witnesses in order to minimize the likelihood of aversive consequences, such as disqualification or malpractice accusations. Authors' Note: Cary Rostow, Ph.D., is president of Matrix, Inc., Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and is in private practice in Baton Rouge. He holds a Diplomate in Police and Criminal Psychology from the Society for Police and Criminal Psychology. Robert Davis, Ph.D., is executive vicepresident and director of science, research, and development, for Matrix, Inc., and has a private practice in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. He holds a Diplomate from the Society for Police and Criminal Psychology. Judith Levy, Ph.D., is currently a postdoctoral fellow at Matrix, Inc.