Bases of Forensic Pathology Expert Testimony With Emphasis on Iowa v Tyler

2021 ◽  
pp. 192536212110609
Author(s):  
Victor W. Weedn
Keyword(s):  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Forensic Pathology ◽  
Forensic Sciences ◽  
Medical Evidence ◽  
Manner Of Death ◽  
Expert Opinions ◽  
Video Recordings ◽  
Police Interviews ◽  
Underlying Basis ◽  
Judicial Scrutiny

Judicial scrutiny of the forensic sciences is increasing. This scrutiny targets the bases for expert opinions. Forensic pathologists must understand that when they express an opinion it must have an articulable underlying basis. Iowa v Tyler provides a cautionary tale where testimony from a forensic pathologist on the cause and manner of death based exclusively on police reports and audio and video recordings of police interviews of the suspect rather than on medical evidence were held to be inadmissible. Tyler has an odd and distinguishable set of facts, but has been widely cited as an example of problematic forensic pathology testimony.

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 MATERIALS OF SOUND AND VIDEO RECORDING AS TYPE OF SOURCE OF EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS

2021 ◽  
pp. 551-566
Author(s):  
H. Kutskir
Keyword(s):  
Video Recording ◽  
Material Object ◽  
Sound Recording ◽  
Practical Application ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Sound Recordings ◽  
Physical Evidence ◽  
Expert Opinions ◽  
Video Recordings ◽  
Factual Data

The article is devoted to clarifying the concept, place and role materials of sound and video recording as type of source of evidence in criminal proceedings. It is noted that evidence may be only those factual data that are obtained as a result of investigative (search) actions and their variety, such as covert investigative (search) actions, other procedural actions that are provided by the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, and in the order provided by the relevant procedural action. Attention is drawn to the fact that the system of procedural sources of evidence used to establish factual data is defined in the CPC of Ukraine and consists of testimony, physical evidence, documents and expert opinions. Attention is paid to documents as a source of evidence. It is determined that the legislator refers the materials of audio and video recordings to such a source of evidence as a document. It is emphasized that in this case it is necessary to evaluate the information itself, and not the material object on which they are recorded. The peculiarities of establishing the features and properties of video and sound recording as a separate type of documents and determining their affiliation to physical evidence or documents due to the specific process of their formation are indicated. Given is a detailed description of the procedure for their delimitation. It is stated that the collection, receipt and request materials of photographs, sound recordings, video recordings and other media belongs to the prosecution, the defense, the victim in order to establish the circumstances relevant to the criminal proceedings. It is emphasized that any collection of evidence is possible only in accordance with the procedure provided for by the CPC of Ukraine, that is, in compliance with the criminal procedural form. The legal consolidation and practical application materials of sound and video recording in criminal proceedings is determined, in particular, that materials of video and sound recording can be obtained as a result of recording the course and content of investigative (search) actions and covert investigative (search) actions, as well as when recording a court session. Video and sound recordings obtained during of procedural actions are attached to the protocols of investigative (search) actions, covert investigative (search) actions and are stored in the materials of criminal proceedings.

Industry Guidelines for the Forensic Investigation of Marine Incidents

2006 ◽  
Vol 43 (01) ◽  
pp. 22-26
Author(s):  
James Angelo Ruggieri
Keyword(s):  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Critical Item ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Scientific Basis ◽  
Scientific Validity ◽  
Trial Judge ◽  
Expert Opinions ◽  
Or Methodology ◽  
Marine Applications ◽  
Guidelines And Standards

Landmark court decisions concerning admissibility of expert testimony indicate that industry guidelines and standards are an appropriate source in the formulation and defense of expert opinions. When properly applied, such guidelines and standards provide experts with ample support in adversarial arenas. Review of the court's responsibility to determine scientific basis and expert opinions resulted in the Daubert decision (Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 [1993]). This Supreme Court decision recognized the importance of the "scientific validity of the principles that underlie a proposed sub-mission" as the most critical item the trial judge must evaluate. Furthermore, the Daubert decision established the trial judge's duty to make a preliminary assessment pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 104(a) "of whether the reasoning or methodology underlying the testimony is scientifically valid." Many lawsuits involving injuries, deaths, or product defects rely on expert opinion. Thus, the reliability of experts, and the validity of the methodology used by the experts in arriving at their conclusions, must be carefully evaluated. It has been shown that the processes governing the development of industry guidelines and standards address these factors (Ruggieri 2004), providing a sound basis for expert opinions where such guidelines exist and are used. Although there are a growing number of development activities producing such guidelines and standards for land-based incidents, there is little in the way of corollary activities specifically addressing the marine arena. Many of the methods and investigative protocols identified in these land-based guidelines and standards can be made marine applicable; however, substantive technology, operational, and regulatory differences between the land-based and marine paradigms indicate that marine-specific guideline documents are needed for marine applications.

Do Video Recordings Help Jurors Recognize Coercive Influences in Interrogations?

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iris Blandón-Gitlin ◽  
Amelia Mindthoff
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Video Recording ◽  
False Confessions ◽  
Jury Decision Making ◽  
Wrongful Convictions ◽  
Video Recordings ◽  
Confession Evidence ◽  
Jury Decision ◽  
Proper Interpretation

In recognition of the role that false confessions play in wrongful convictions, it is recommended that criminal interrogations be video recorded from beginning to end to document the process by which suspects decide to confess. With a full video recording, it is assumed that jurors can see for themselves whether the defendant was coerced to confess to a crime he or she did not commit. Yet research suggests that video recording may in fact induce bias in interpretations of coercion and confession reliability, as factors like camera angles and close-ups can make confession evidence too vivid and persuasive. Without proper interpretation, even seemingly neutral recordings may unduly influence jurors’ decisions about confessions. This chapter reviews the literature on the usefulness of video-recorded interrogations in assisting jury decision-making, as well as the potential for procedural safeguards (e.g., expert testimony) to improve jurors’ understanding of the issues at hand.

scholarly journals Virtopsy: New Dimension in the Field of Forensic Medicine communities

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (Number 1) ◽  
pp. 30-33
Author(s):  
Utpal Kumar Biswas ◽  
Mohammad Ahad Hossain ◽  
K. M. Moinuddin ◽  
Nashid Tabassum Khan
Keyword(s):  
Forensic Medicine ◽  
Work Flow ◽  
Forensic Sciences ◽  
Daily Routine ◽  
Manner Of Death ◽  
New Methods ◽  
Routine Work ◽  
One Step ◽  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging Mri ◽  
Radiological Procedures

Forensic medicine aims for the documentation of medical and other forensic findings in living and deceased persons, for the police and the judiciary system. An Autopsy is a highly surgical procedure that consists of a thorough examination of a corpse to determine the cause and manner of death to evaluate any disease or injury that may be present. Though in other branches of the specialty, newer techniques are part of daily routine, in autopsy, the same century old techniques are still being used. Virtopsy is one step ahead in this field which literally means virtual autopsy. New methods like 3D-surface scanning and modern radiological procedures like computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are becoming more and more part of scientific research in forensic sciences and are today part of the routine work flow in a some institutes of legal medicine. This paper is aimed to discuss a few points in the field of Virtopsy.

Exploring Juror Evaluations of Expert Opinions Using the Expert Persuasion Expectancy (ExPEx) Framework

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristy Martire ◽  
Danielle Navarro ◽  
Gary Edmond
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Gait Analysis ◽  
Expert Opinion ◽  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Jury Decision Making ◽  
Expert Evidence ◽  
Subjective Ratings ◽  
Expert Opinions ◽  
Jury Decision

Title: Exploring Juror Evaluations of Expert Opinions Using the Expert Persuasion Expectancy (ExPEx) Framework PurposeFactfinders in trials struggle to differentiate witnesses who offer genuinely expert opinions from those who do not. The Expert Persuasion Expectancy (ExPEx) framework proposes eight attributes logically relevant to this assessment: foundation, field, specialty, ability, opinion, support, consistency and trustworthiness. We present two experiments examining the effects of these attributes on the persuasiveness of a forensic gait analysis opinion. MethodsJury-eligible participants rated the credibility, value and weight of an expert report that was either generally strong (Exp. 1; N = 437) or generally weak (Exp. 2; N = 435). The quality of ExPEx attributes varied between participants. Allocation to condition (none, foundation, field, specialty, ability, opinion, support, consistency, trustworthiness) determined which attribute in the report would be weak (cf. strong; Exp. 1), or strong (cf. weak; Exp. 2). ResultsIn Experiment 1, the persuasiveness of a strong report was significantly undermined by weak versions of ability, consistency and trustworthiness. In Experiment 2. a weak report was significantly improved by strong versions of ability and consistency. Unplanned analyses of subjective ratings also identified effects of foundation, field, specialty and opinion.ConclusionsWe found that evidence that ability (i.e., personal proficiency), consistency (i.e., endorsement by other experts), and trustworthiness (i.e., objectivity) attributes influence opinion persuasiveness in logically appropriate ways. Ensuring that factfinders have information about these attributes may improve their assessments of expert opinion evidence. KEYWORDS: Expert opinion; Persuasion; Expert Testimony; Jury decision-making; Expert evidence

Mirror, mirror on the wall, who’s the least biased of them all? Dangers and potential solutions regarding bias in forensic psychological evaluations

2019 ◽  
Vol 49 (2) ◽  
pp. 165-176 ◽  
Author(s):  
W Neil Gowensmith ◽  
Kate E McCallum
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Psychological Assessment ◽  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Self Monitoring ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
Expert Opinions ◽  
Psychological Evaluations ◽  
Human Decision ◽  
Mirror Mirror ◽  
Do So

When psychological evaluators are asked to provide their expert opinions in legal proceedings, they are expected to do so in an objective and unbiased way. The statutory requirements regarding the admissibility of expert testimony in many countries often cite objectivity and reliability as standards. However, as is true in many realms of human decision-making, the field of forensic psychological assessment is fraught with bias. In this article, we discuss several lines of research that have investigated bias in forensic psychological evaluations. We also discuss emerging lines of research involving methods to measure and reduce bias. We conclude with a call for structured self-monitoring as an important strategy for forensic evaluators to mitigate bias in their work.

scholarly journals Radiological findings at a South African forensic pathology laboratory in cases of sudden unexpected death in infants

2012 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-6
Author(s):  
Naomi Fenton-Muir ◽  
Kgahlego Kewana ◽  
Yenziwe Ngema ◽  
Linda Liebenberg ◽  
Tania S. Douglas
Keyword(s):  
Digital Radiography ◽  
Forensic Pathology ◽  
Imaging Finding ◽  
Sudden Unexpected Death ◽  
Preliminary Evaluation ◽  
Radiological Findings ◽  
Unexpected Death ◽  
Pathology Laboratory ◽  
Manner Of Death ◽  
Full Body

Objectives The work serves as a preliminary evaluation of the utility of the full-body radiography in examining cases of SUDI. Setting This paper reviews findings from full-body digital radiography in cases of sudden unexpected death in infants (SUDI) in 2008 at the Salt River Forensic Pathology Laboratory in Cape Town. Subjects Cases of SUDI referred to the mortuary and undergoing full-body digital radiography were reviewed (192 cases). Design Imaging reports were cross-referenced with death registry data. Manner of death, cause of death, whether an autopsy had taken place, and radiological findings, were recorded and analysed. Results The absence of bony fractures was recorded as an imaging finding in 40% of cases. The most common type of imaging pathology was lung disease. In cases where autopsies were performed and pathology was found on imaging, the findings of the two methods of examination were consistent. Conclusions Imaging may have served to assist CoD determination based on case history, and therefore full-body radiography may improve the workflow in busy forensic pathology laboratories. More detailed and consistent recording of imaging findings is required before stronger conclusions may be drawn regarding the utility of full body digital imaging of paediatric cases in forensic pathology laboratories.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document