A Trial Consultant's View of the Medical Expert Witness

2013 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 7-10
Author(s):  
Deborah Rutt ◽  
Kathyrn Mueller
Keyword(s):  
Nonverbal Communication ◽  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Medical Literature ◽  
Expert Witness ◽  
Personal Injury ◽  
Expert Witnesses ◽  
Good Teacher ◽  
Medical Expert ◽  
Medical Terms ◽  
Medical Issues

Abstract Physicians who use the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides) often serve as medical expert witnesses. In workers’ compensation cases, the expert may appear in front of a judge or hearing officer; in personal injury and other cases, the physician may testify by deposition or in court before a judge with or without a jury. This article discusses why medical expert witnesses are needed, what they do, and how they can help or hurt a case. Whether it is rendered by a judge or jury, the final opinions rely on laypersons’ understanding of medical issues. Medical expert testimony extracts from the intricacies of the medical literature those facts the trier of fact needs to understand; highlights the medical facts pertinent to decision making; and explains both these in terms that are understandable to a layperson, thereby enabling the judge or jury to render well-informed opinions. For expert witnesses, communication is everything, including nonverbal communication that critically determines if judges and, particularly, jurors believe a witness. To these ends, an expert medical witnesses should know the case; be objective; be a good teacher; state opinions clearly; testify with appropriate professional demeanor; communicate well, both verbally and nonverbally; in verbal communications, explain medical terms and procedures so listeners can understand the case; and avoid medical jargon, finding fault or blaming, becoming argumentative, or appearing arrogant.

scholarly journals Performing Expertise: The Design of Audiovisual Links and the Construction of the Remote Expert Witness in Court

2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (5) ◽  
pp. 698-718
Author(s):  
Emma Rowden ◽  
Anne Wallace
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Load ◽  
Empirical Research ◽  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Expert Witness ◽  
Mode Of Delivery ◽  
Expert Witnesses ◽  
Expert Evidence ◽  
Jury Trials ◽  
Technological Improvements ◽  
The Relationship

This article reports on empirical research conducted into the use of audiovisual links (videolinks) to take expert testimony in jury trials. Studies reveal ambivalent attitudes to court use of videolink, with most previous research focussed on its use for vulnerable witnesses and defendants. Our study finds there are issues unique to expert witnesses appearing by videolink, such as compromised ability to gesture and interact with exhibits and demonstrative tools, and reductions in availability of feedback to gauge juror understanding. Overall, the use of videolinks adds an additional cognitive load to the task of giving expert evidence. While many of these issues might be addressed through environmental or technological improvements, we argue this research has broader ramifications for expert witnesses and the courts. The use of videolinks for taking expert evidence exposes the contingent nature of expertise and the cultural scaffolding inherent in its construction. In reflecting on the implications of these findings, and on the way that reliability, credibility and expertise are defined and established in court, we suggest a more critical engagement with the relationship between content and mode of delivery by stakeholders.

Pathology Expert Witness Testimony and Pathology Practice: A Tale of 2 Standards

2005 ◽  
Vol 129 (10) ◽  
pp. 1268-1276
Author(s):  
Elliott Foucar
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Medical Literature ◽  
Expert Witness ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Background Information ◽  
Malpractice Litigation ◽  
Expert Opinions ◽  
Mesh Terms

Abstract Context.—Pathologists work in an environment in which, to the extent possible, diagnostic decisions are based on scientific principles. It can therefore be a rather shocking experience when a pathologist finds one of his or her diagnostic decisions being evaluated by a legal system developed and controlled by lawyers and judges rather than by scientists or pathologists. This experience can be even more troubling when a key participant in the proceedings is a fellow pathologist guiding a jury toward an unfamiliar interpretation of the pathology standard of care. Objective.—To provide the interested pathologist with the background information necessary to (1) understand the role of expert testimony in malpractice litigation and (2) understand why there can be a gap between expert opinions expressed in court and expert opinions expressed in a medical care context. Data Sources.—Medical literature review supplemented by review of subspecialty position papers, selected articles from newspapers and magazines, and legal decisions. The medical literature review was limited to articles published in English and was based largely on articles retrieved using the MeSH terms expert testimony/legislation & jurisprudence, and pathology/legislation & jurisprudence. Conclusions.—Medical error has become an increasingly important topic for pathologists, and although errors or allegations of error are evaluated in many ways, the evaluation with the most impact on the individual pathologist is a malpractice case. During the last decade physicians have increasingly become aware of the critical role played by expert testimony in malpractice litigation. Some physicians have asserted that providing expert testimony is the practice of medicine, and that it is unacceptable for juries to be presented with expert testimony that incorrectly describes medical practice standards. However, this opinion has been vigorously opposed by attorneys who feel that juries are best able to come to a correct conclusion if they base their deliberations on a broad spectrum of opinion. Gaining an increased role in the oversight of expert testimony would allow physicians to establish a closer alignment between opinions expressed in court testimony and opinions expressed in clinical practice. However, despite some physician success in inserting themselves into the oversight process, both physicians and physician organizations attempting to take action against misleading expert testimony continue to be vulnerable to legal attack.

scholarly journals Peran Dokter sebagai Saksi Ahli Di Persidangan

2013 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 101
Author(s):  
Rika Susanti
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Expert Witness ◽  
Medical Science ◽  
Medical Doctor ◽  
Expert Witnesses ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Medical Expert ◽  
Expert Information ◽  
Special Skill ◽  
Independent Expert

AbstrakPemanfaatan ilmu kedokteran forensik dalam penegakan hukum serta keadilan membutuhkan dokter sebagai saksi ahli medis di persidangan. Saksi ahli pada dasarnya adalah seseorang yang memiliki pengetahuan, pengalaman dan keahlian khusus sebagai dasar dalam memberikan keterangan ahli suatu perkara pidana. Kewajiban dokter untuk membuat keterangan ahli diatur dalam Kitab Undang-undang Acara Pidana dan dalam etika kedokteran. Kehadiran dokter sebagai saksi ahli dapat diminta oleh jaksa penuntut ataupun penasehat hukum tersangka atas persetujuan hakim. Dokter dapat menjadi saksi fakta (dokter yang merawat) atau saksi pendapat (ahli independen) tergantung keterangan yang dibutuhkan pengadilan. Dalam memberikan keterangan ahli, dokter harus mengikuti ketentuan yang berlaku di persidangan Indonesia, sehingga penting bagi dokter untuk mengetahui tata cara dan sikap dokter sebagai saksi ahli dan mengikuti pedoman menjadi saksi ahli kedokteran.Kata kunci: Dokter sebagai aksi ahli, dasar hukum, persidangan, pedoman saksi ahliAbstractThe utilization of forensic medical science in law enforcement and justice requires a medical doctor as an expert medical witness in court. An expert witness is basically a person who has knowledge, experience and special skill as a basis in providing expertise which is caused a criminal. The obligation of the doctor to make expert explanation is arranged in the book of the law in the crime and in medical ethics.The presence of the doctor as an expert witness can be requested by the prosecutor or the lawyer of the suspect upon approval the judge. Doctors can be as a witness of fact (the treating doctor) or as a witness of opinion (the independent expert witness), depending on the information needed at the court. In providing expert information, the doctor should follow the applicable provisions in Council of Indonesia, so it is important for the doctor to know the ordinances and the attitude of doctors acting as medical witnesses.Keywords: Doctors as medical expert witnesses,legal basis, court, guidelines for expert witness.

scholarly journals THE COST ASPECT OF MEDICAL EXPERT WITNESSES AND THE POSSIBLE INTRODUCTION OF A MEDICAL EXPERT WITNESS PANEL IN SOUTH AFRICA

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma Tratschler
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Expert Witness ◽  
Expert Witnesses ◽  
Court Cases ◽  
Medical Expert ◽  
Medical Practitioners ◽  
Pro Bono ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Cost Aspect

This article is underscored by the importance of expect witnesses on court cases but also the realisation that expert witnesses are often beyond the means of those who need them. An analogy is drawn between the pro bono work that legal practitioners must do and the idea that medical practitioners can serve as expert witnesses as part of their pro bono work. This article will critically evaluate whether medical practitioners should be required to give themselves a certain number of pro bono hours to serve as expert witnesses.

scholarly journals Property liability of expert witnesses (articulation of the problem)

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-17
Author(s):  
Daria Zatonova
Keyword(s):  
Expert Opinion ◽  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Expert Witness ◽  
Civil Liability ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
Second Opinion ◽  
Expert Witnesses ◽  
Court Case ◽  
Valid Evidence

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.

Expert Testimony

2020 ◽  
pp. 165-188
Author(s):  
William Douglas Woody ◽  
Krista D. Forrest
Keyword(s):  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Expert Witness ◽  
Expert Witnesses ◽  
Legal Standards

The authors start this chapter with an interview with Dr. Charles Honts, who has served as an expert witness over one hundred times, as a polygraph examiner and about false and coerced confessions. The authors discuss requirements and potential roles of expert witnesses, and then move to relevant topics about which clinical and/or experimental experts may testify. The authors then examine the legal standards and ongoing disputes about admissibility of expert testimony at trial before moving to scientific studies of the impacts of expert testimony on triers of fact. The chapter concludes with a review of experts and the totality of the circumstances.

scholarly journals The psychiatrist as expert witness. Part 1: general principles and civil cases

2008 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith J. B. Rix
Keyword(s):  
Expert Witness ◽  
Expert Witnesses ◽  
Medical Expert ◽  
Administration Of Justice ◽  
Civil Cases ◽  
The Uk

Expert witnesses have recently had a bad press but they have long played an important role in the administration of justice. This article begins by drawing attention to the guidance of the UK Academy of Medical Royal Colleges for medical expert witnesses and then sets out the latest guidance for experts in civil cases.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document