Relationship with Other Experts
It is the nature of our adversarial court system that two experts will testify that they have come to different conclusions about the same person. How that fundamental disagreement is handled by the expert determines whether jurors must witness a “pissing contest” or are thoughtfully educated about the nature of the disagreement. Depending on the litigation strategy, one or both attorneys may want to incite such a contest. This chapter provides rationale and strategies from seasoned forensic psychologists and neuropsychologists as well as attorneys and judges for avoiding unproductive conflicts while accurately and productively explaining differences in opinions. Experts, attorneys, and judges all agreed that tearing down another expert’s credibility damages your own on the stand.