Expert evidence: difficulties and solutions in prosecutions for infant harm

Legal Studies ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 279-300 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Hartshorne ◽  
José Miola
Keyword(s):  
Expert Evidence ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Trial Judges ◽  
Gate Keeping ◽  
The Law ◽  
Consultation Paper

This paper identifies and considers difficulties that gave rise to successful appeals from prosecutions where expert evidence was relied upon to demonstrate that defendants had killed or caused harm to infants in their care. It evaluates the extent to which these difficulties may be addressed by measures which have been introduced or proposed by way of tackling problems associated with expert evidence. Part of the paper is dedicated to an analysis of the Law Commission's consultation paper on the admissibility of expert evidence in criminal proceedings. The paper argues that trial judges may not be best placed to discharge the Law Commission's proposed gate-keeping test for screening the reliability of expert evidence. Expert evidence will often be ‘outcome determinative’ in prosecutions for infant harm, which is why we argue for the introduction of a specialist gate-keeping panel instead to determine the reliability of new theories and techniques.

The Reliability of Expert Evidence: Reflections on the Law Commission's Proposals for Reform

2009 ◽  
Vol 73 (6) ◽  
pp. 488-507
Author(s):  
Liz Heffernan ◽  
Mark Coen
Keyword(s):  
Expert Evidence ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
Trial Judge ◽  
Ongoing Controversy ◽  
American Experience ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Law ◽  
Consultation Paper ◽  
Law Commission

The problems associated with the use of expert evidence by the criminal courts have been the subject of ongoing controversy. The Law Commission of England and Wales has recently added its voice to the debate with the publication of a Consultation Paper on the admissibility of expert evidence. This article examines the current law governing the reliability of expert evidence. It analyses the Law Commission's recommendation for the creation of a new statutory rule which would require the trial judge to assess evidentiary reliability as a matter of admissibility. The authors chart the emergence of the US Daubert test, on which the recommendation is based, and consider the lessons to be learned from American experience. While welcoming the recommendation in principle, the authors argue that the crafting and implementation of the proposed admissibility requirement would present formidable challenges.

scholarly journals Os Impactos Processuais da Inobservância Procedimental no Âmbito da Cadeia de Custódia

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 02-06
Author(s):  
Almir Santos Reis Junior ◽  
Larissa Crislaine França
Keyword(s):  
Expert Evidence ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Probative Value ◽  
Deductive Method ◽  
Chain Of Custody ◽  
The Law ◽  
Legal Consequences

ResumoA cadeia de custódia foi introduzida na legislação processual por meio da Lei 13.964/19, com escopo de garantir o registro e o rastreamento da prova pericial, desde seu nascimento até o seu perecimento, para garantir a integridade dos vestígios de determinado crime. Sob esta lente, o presente trabalho analisa as consequências jurídicas sobre a quebra da cadeia de custódia, no intuito de averiguar se tal quebra causaria a inadmissibilidade da prova ou diminuiria o seu valor probatório. Para tanto, empregou-se o método hipotético-dedutivo que consistiu na revisão bibliográfica de doutrina nacional e estrangeira. Chegou-se a conclusão de que a ruptura da cadeia de custódia culmina na produção de provas ilegítimas no processo penal, devendo ser desentranhadas dos autos e inutilizadas. Palavras-chave: Ilicitude da Prova. Inadmissibilidade das Provas Ilícitas. Lei Anticrime. Quebra da Cadeia de Custódia. AbstractThe chain of custody was introduced in the procedural legislation through the Law 13.964/19, with the aim to assure the registration and to track the expert evidence, from its birth to its perishing, to guarantee the integrity of the traces of a certain crime. Under this lens, the present study analyzes the legal consequences of the break on the chain of custody, in order to ascertain whether such breach would cause the evidence to be inadmissible or if it would decrease its probative value. For this, the hypothetical-deductive method was applied, which consisted in a bibliographic review of national and foreign doctrine. The conclusion reached was that the rupture on the chain of custody culminates in the production of illegitimate evidence in the criminal proceedings, which must be removed from the records and discarded. Keywords: Illicit Evidence. Suppression Doctrine. Anticrime Law. Break on the Chain of Custody.

scholarly journals Expert Evidence in Criminal Proceedings

2016 ◽  
Vol 80 (5) ◽  
pp. 344-363 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Stockdale ◽  
Adam Jackson
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Expert Evidence ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Novel Approach ◽  
Additional Costs ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Government ◽  
Bar Association ◽  
Draft Bill

In its 2011 report Expert Evidence in Criminal Proceedings in England and Wales (Law Com No. 325), the Law Commission recommended that the admissibility of expert evidence in criminal proceedings should be governed by a new statutory regime comprising a new statutory reliability test in combination with codification and refinement of existing common law principles relating to ‘assistance’, ‘expertise’ and ‘impartiality’. The government declined to enact the Law Commission’s draft Bill due to a lack of certainty as to whether the additional costs incurred would be offset by savings. Instead the government invited the Criminal Procedure Rule Committee (CrimPRC) to consider amendments to the Criminal Procedure Rules (CrimPR) to introduce, as far as possible, the spirit of the Law Commission’s recommendations. The consequent amendments to CrimPR Part 33 (now CrimPR Part 19) in combination with the making of the new Practice Direction CrimPD 33A (now CrimPD 19A) by the Lord Chief Justice resulted in what he described in his 2014 Criminal Bar Association Kalisher Lecture as ‘a novel way of implementing an excellent Report’. This paper considers the possible evolution of the common law in light of these amendments, the challenges associated with adopting such a novel approach to reform and the potential opportunities for the improvement of expert evidence in criminal proceedings that the changes were intended to create.

СУД ЯК УЧАСНИК КРИМІНАЛЬНОГО ПРОВАДЖЕННЯ

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
pp. 211-217
Author(s):  
В. В. Король ◽  
В. Д. Юрчишин
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Power ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Unique Position ◽  
Territorial Jurisdiction ◽  
Governmental Body ◽  
The Law

У статті зазначається, що серед учасників кримінального провадження суд посідає ви­ключне становище, оскільки тільки він є єдиним державним органом, що здійснює судову владу у визначених законом процесуальних формах. При цьому вказується, що суд по­трібно вважати встановленим законом лише за умови, що він утворений безпосередньо на підставі закону, діє в межах своєї предметної, функціональної й територіальної юрисдикції та в законному складі суду.   The article notes that among the participants in criminal proceedings the court occupies a unique position, because only it is the only governmental body which exercises the judicial power as defined by law procedural forms. It is submitted, that the court should consider the law only when it is formed directly on the basis of the law, acting within their subject, func­tional and territorial jurisdiction and legal composition of court.

Psychosoziale Prozessbegleitung im Strafverfahren

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Ilsner
Keyword(s):  
Legal Status ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Legal Institution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Innovation ◽  
The Law

The legal status of victims of violent criminality has been in the spotlight during recent decades. The institutionalization of psychosocial assistance in criminal proceedings represents the temporary peak of this development. In this study, the author focuses on the legal innovation, analyzes it fundamentally (especially regarding the recently formulated § 406g StPO), and submits specific reform proposals correspondingly. This research includes four systematically structured chapters, which impart the essential features of the legal institution, elucidate the legal framework, and finally appoint considerations regarding its transfer into the law of civil procedure.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document