Legal Expert Witnesses

The concept of Expert Witness is not covered by the procedural legislation of Ukraine, although it has become widespread in research papers of processional scientists. In scientific publications, scholars are fragmentarily considering certain categories of versed persons, formulate the notion of special knowledge that they possess, but the types of specialists, their functions and competence still remain controversial and ambiguously interpreted by lawyers. The purpose of this article is to define the general concept and functional purpose of expert witnesses in any type of legal process, their classification, to clarify expertise structure. This article proves that expert witnesses can have special (non-legal) expertise and expertise in the field of law. The purpose of involving expert witnesses is to assist the authorized participants of the process in the performance of their functions. Expert witnesses include: forensic expert; legal expert; specialist; translator, sign language interpreter, persons testifying on the basis of their expertise; medical examiner, teacher, psychologist, doctor, psychiatrist, auditor; inspectors; experts of the Scientific Advisory Board of the Supreme Court; consultants pre-investigate facilities, screening and forensic facilities and persons according to criminal records. There are two grounds for the classification of expert witnesses in legal proceedings: the first is the direct or indirect way of participation in the proceedings; the second is the degree of legal regulation of the process and results of the activities of expert witnesses. Expert witness in legal proceedings is subject owning expertise (non-legal) in a particular field of human activity or legal knowledge, skills in their application is not a professional participant in the process, is involved directly or indirectly in a procedurally regulated or non-regulated form or at the discretion of an authorized person (body) to assist in the resolution of the tasks of the judiciary and the information and documents provided by him are used as sources of evidence or background information serving grounds for procedural, tactical and organizational decisions.

Download Full-text

A Trial Consultant's View of the Medical Expert Witness

Guides Newsletter ◽

10.1001/amaguidesnewsletters.2013.julaug03 ◽

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.

Download Full-text