This article examines the standards governing the admission of new types of expert evidence. Based on the rules of evidence and procedure in Australia, it explains how judges have been largely uninterested in the reliability of expert opinion evidence. Focused on the use of CCTV images and covert sound recordings for the purposes of identification, but relevant to other forensic sciences, the article explains the need for interest in the reliability of incriminating expert opinion evidence. It also explains why many of the traditional trial safeguards may not be particularly useful for identifying or explaining problems and complexities with scientific and technical evidence. In closing, the article argues that those developing new types of evidence and new techniques, whether identification-based or derived from IT, camera or computer forensics, need to be able to explain why it is that the court can have confidence in any opinions expressed.
Whats Wrong With Expert Testimony? What Should Be Done About It?
