Sleepwalking, criminal behavior, and reliable scientific evidence: A guide for expert witnesses.

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark R. Pressman
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Behavior ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Expert Witnesses

United States Supreme Court Rules on Expert Testimony

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1995 ◽  
Vol 95 (6) ◽  
pp. 934-936 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary N. McAbee
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
United States Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
State Courts ◽  
Expert Witnesses ◽  
Us Supreme Court

Many medical and legal commentators have expressed concern about the validity of scientific evidence that is proffered by expert witnesses at depositions and in courts of law.1,2 The sparse research that is available on the testimony of medical expert witnesses suggests that it is frequently flawed and erroneous.3 On June 28, 1993, the United States (US) Supreme Court ruled on the proper standard for admissibility of scientific evidence in the courtroom.4 Although the ruling establishes guidelines that are binding only in federal courts, it is expected that many state courts will follow the Court's ruling. This commentary reviews the Court's guidelines for admissibility of expert testimony, and expresses concern about their applicability in future cases involving scientific testimony.

Children's resiliency versus vulnerability to attachment trauma in guardianship cases

1995 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 487-515
Author(s):  
Madelyn Simring Milchman
Keyword(s):  
New Jersey ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Expert Witnesses ◽  
Parental Rights ◽  
Termination Of Parental Rights ◽  
Attachment Trauma ◽  
Biological Parents

In recent New Jersey termination of parental rights cases, expert witnesses opined that children can be resilient, recovering from loss of their psychological parents by “rebonding” to biological parents. N.J. Supreme Court judges concluded that there is a scientific conflict between research on children's resiliency and research on bonding, a conflict that raises doubt regarding the likelihood that severe and enduring harm is caused by breaking bonds to psychological parents. This article reviews the scientific evidence upon which this testimony is based and provides a framework for questioning experts in such cases.

Training for communication in forensic science

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brenda L. Hoffman ◽  
Lucina Hackman ◽  
Laura A. Lindenfeld
Keyword(s):  
Forensic Science ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Communication Training ◽  
Expert Witnesses ◽  
Societal Impact ◽  
Conceptual System ◽  
Stakeholder Groups ◽  
Key Issues ◽  
And Training

Scientists are increasingly becoming better prepared to communicate science in a variety of different settings, yet significantly less attention has been paid to communicating science in the courtroom, a setting which carries major societal impact. This article explores key issues surrounding science communication in the courtroom. We outline a conceptual system for communication training that includes ideas about fostering greater collaboration across different stakeholder groups, and training expert witnesses to communicate scientific evidence in ways that are accessible and accurate. Critical to this concept is supporting communication that upholds the integrity of the science, while also maintaining expectations for interactions in the courtroom.

Expert Testimony in the Dock

2005 ◽  
Vol 69 (4) ◽  
pp. 330-348 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Expert Witnesses ◽  
Science Community

This article focuses predominantly on the recent miscarriages of justice in the cases of Angela Cannings and Sally Clark. The article identifies possible causes of error in trials involving expert testimony. It is suggested that admission of scientific evidence may inevitably elicit such miscarriages of justice. In order to reduce their frequency, however, experts need training in both scientific and forensic methodology. The science community must also ensure vigilance against scientific dogma. The cases show that responsibility does not lie solely at the feet of expert witnesses. Advocates need training in how to deal with expert testimony. Finally, the use of the jury in complex scientific trials is considered and approved.

It’s a Crime: Reexamining the Successful Use of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder as a Legal Defense to Child Sexual Assault in the Canadian Case of R. v. Borsch

2007 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sonja Grover
Keyword(s):  
Posttraumatic Stress Disorder ◽  
Sexual Assault ◽  
Posttraumatic Stress ◽  
Criminal Behavior ◽  
Stress Disorder ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Belief System ◽  
Insanity Defense ◽  
Causal Link ◽  
Child Sexual Assault

This article discusses the 2006 Canadian case of R. v. Borsch in which posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) was successfully used as the basis for an insanity defense in a child sexual assault case. It is argued that there is no scientific evidence of a causal link between PTSD and violent criminal behavior. The facts of the Borsch case are discussed in order to highlight the illegitimacy of basing an insanity defense on PTSD. The court’s drawing of a causal link in Borsch between the defendant’s alleged PTSD and his committing a child sexual assault creates a maladaptive culturally defined belief system. That belief system assigns to defendants an alleged entitlement, due to PTSD, to commit violent acts by holding these acts to be an inevitable outcome for a variety of reasons in the particular instance. The similarities between PTSD and the so-called “culture-bound” mental disorder of “amok” are also discussed.

scholarly journals Alcohol-induced sleepwalking or confusional arousal as a defense to criminal behavior: a review of scientific evidence, methods and forensic considerations

2007 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 198-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
MARK R. PRESSMAN ◽  
MARK W. MAHOWALD ◽  
CARLOS H. SCHENCK ◽  
MICHEL CRAMER BORNEMANN
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Behavior ◽  
Scientific Evidence

Lessons Learned From Coaching Postsecondary Students With Traumatic Brain Injury

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 88-96
Author(s):  
Mary R. T. Kennedy
Keyword(s):  
College Students ◽  
Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Brain Injury ◽  
Sense Of Self ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Sudden Onset ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Speech Language Pathologists ◽  
The Brain ◽  
Exhaustive List

Purpose The purpose of this clinical focus article is to provide speech-language pathologists with a brief update of the evidence that provides possible explanations for our experiences while coaching college students with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Method The narrative text provides readers with lessons we learned as speech-language pathologists functioning as cognitive coaches to college students with TBI. This is not meant to be an exhaustive list, but rather to consider the recent scientific evidence that will help our understanding of how best to coach these college students. Conclusion Four lessons are described. Lesson 1 focuses on the value of self-reported responses to surveys, questionnaires, and interviews. Lesson 2 addresses the use of immediate/proximal goals as leverage for students to update their sense of self and how their abilities and disabilities may alter their more distal goals. Lesson 3 reminds us that teamwork is necessary to address the complex issues facing these students, which include their developmental stage, the sudden onset of trauma to the brain, and having to navigate going to college with a TBI. Lesson 4 focuses on the need for college students with TBI to learn how to self-advocate with instructors, family, and peers.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document