Forensic Testimony: Science, Law and Expert Evidence—favored with an Honorable Mention in Law & Legal Studies at the Association of American Publishers' 2015 PROSE Awards—provides a clear and intuitive discussion of the legal presentation of expert testimony. The book delves into the effects, processes, and battles that occur in the presentation of opinion and scientific evidence by court-accepted forensic experts. It provides a timely review of the United States Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) regarding expert testimony, and includes a multi-disciplinary look at the strengths and weaknesses in forensic science courtroom testimony. The statutes and the effects of judicial uses (or non-use) of the FRE, Daubert, Kumho, and the 2009 NAS Report on Forensic Science are also included. The presentation expands to study case law, legal opinions, and studies on the reliability and pitfalls of forensic expertise in the US court system. This book is an essential reference for anyone preparing to give expert testimony of forensic evidence. - Honorable Mention in the 2015 PROSE Awards in Law & Legal Studies from the Association of American Publishers - A multi-disciplinary forensic reference examining the strengths and weaknesses of forensic science in courtroom testimony - Focuses on forensic testimony and judicial decisions in light of the Federal Rules of Evidence, case interpretations, and the NAS report findings - Case studies, some from the Innocence Project, assist the reader in distinguishing good testimony from bad

"The Methods of Attacking Scientific Evidence catalogs potential attacks on the admissibility and weight of expert testimony and scientific evidence and dissects the strategic factors involved"--

Forensic science evidence and expert witness testimony play an increasingly prominent role in modern criminal proceedings. Science produces powerful evidence of criminal offending, but has also courted controversy and sometimes contributed towards miscarriages of justice. The twenty-six articles and essays reproduced in this volume explore the theoretical foundations of modern scientific proof and critically consider the practical issues to which expert evidence gives rise in contemporary criminal trials. The essays are prefaced by a substantial new introduction which provides an overview and incisive commentary contextualising the key debates. The volume begins by placingforensic science in interdisciplinary focus, with contributions from historical, sociological, Science and Technology Studies (STS), philosophical and jurisprudential perspectives. This is followed by closer examination of the role of forensic science and other expert evidence in criminal proceedings, exposing enduring tensions and addressing recent controversies in the relationship between science and criminal law. A third set of contributions considers the practical challenges of interpreting and communicating forensic science evidence. This perennial battle continues to be fought at the intersection between the logic of scientific inference and the psychology of the fact-finder‘scommon sense reasoning. Finally, the volume‘s fourth group of essays evaluates the (limited) success of existing procedural reforms aimed at improving the reception of expert testimony in criminal adjudication, and considers future prospects for institutional renewal - with a keen eye to comparative law models and experiences, success stories and cautionary tales.

The federal courts are seeking ways to increase the ability of judges to deal with difficult issues of scientific expert testimony. The workshop explored the new environment judges, plaintiffs, defendants, and experts face in light of "Daubert" and "Kumho," when presenting and evaluating scientific, engineering, and medical evidence.

This project addressed the admissibility of expert evidence in criminal proceedings in England and Wales. Currently, too much expert opinion evidence is admitted without adequate scrutiny because no clear test is being applied to determine whether the evidence is sufficiently reliable to be admitted. Juries may therefore be reaching conclusions on the basis of unreliable evidence, as confirmed by a number of miscarriages of justice in recent years. Following consultation on a discussion paper (LCCP 190, 2009, ISDBN 9780118404655) the Commission recommends that there should be a new reliability-based admissibility test for expert evidence in criminal proceedings. The test would not need to be applied routinely or unnecessarily, but it would be applied in appropriate cases and it would result in the exclusion of unreliable expert opinion evidence. Under the test, expert opinion evidence would not be admitted unless it was adjudged to be sufficiently reliable to go before a jury. The draft Criminal Evidence (Experts) Bill published with the report (as Appendix A) sets out the admissibility test and also provides the guidance judges would need when applying the test, setting out the key reasons why an expert's opinion evidence might be unreliable. The Bill also codifies (with slight modifications) the uncontroversial aspects of the present law, so that all the admissibility requirements for expert evidence would be set out in a single Act of Parliament and carry equal authority.

This popular casebook is designed to provide those participating in trials with a concise understanding of the scope of the most commonly encountered types of expert testimony, and the nature of the results which may be expected from specialists. It explores both the potentialities and limitations of various types of expert proof. It considers qualifications needed for expertise in these various professional disciplines and discusses the status of the law concerning the various types of evidence encountered. The book first deals with the general concepts underlying expert opinion testimony, with the use of real and demonstrative evidence, and with opinion testimony of non-expert skilled witnesses. It then turns in succession to expert testimony based upon the physical sciences, and expert witnesses in the biological and life sciences. Finally, the book explores expert testimony in the behavioral sciences.