Coroners' Interested Advocacy: Understanding Wrongful Accusations and Convictions

Abstract

The problems of forensic pathologists' court testimony leading to wrongful convictions in cases of infant death, especially where mothers are charged with the offence, and of this testimony possibly involving gross distortion of scientific findings arise, in part, through a systematic misunderstanding by the law, and by judges and jurors, of forensic pathologists', and especially coroners', attitude toward their professional obligations. The law takes forensic pathological and coronial testimony to be “disinterested” scientific fact advanced purely for its inherent value in assisting the truth-seeking element of the trial process, and thus highly reliable as the basis of the exercise of the most coercive powers of government. Those delivering the testimony understand their task as part of a broader, long-standing public health and safety mandate to “speak for the dead to protect the living.” This clash of discursive frameworks has undermined the adversarial element of these trials, not just on a contingent case-by-case basis but over the courses of extended campaigns against child abuse and of professional forensic pathological careers.