Giving the evidence

Abstract

The output of the work of a forensic pathologist could be distilled into the delivery of information to a range of justice agencies and in particular to the forum of a court or other judicial or quasi judicial tribunal. The increasing complexity and knowledge base of forensic and medical science and the growing emphasis on ‘evidence based medicine' poses significant challenges to the delivery of technical oral testimony in legal proceedings. Indeed these issues also raise problems in the production of medico-legal reports that suitably demonstrate the results of the tests undertaken in a medico-legal death investigation. New technology in the form of autopsy CT and MRI scans as well as superimposition techniques in anthropology and dentistry present particular challenges when raised in evidence, not so much in their acceptability by the court, although this is an ongoing issue, but with regard to how such virtual 3D data can be admitted and subjected to legal scrutiny through the process of cross examination. How juries receive and comprehend such evidence is also an unknown quantity. Are they overawed by the technology so that they assume the pathologist must be correct or are they confused by it and therefore dismiss it. This joint session culminating in a ‘Hot Tub' expert panel will review the state of the law with regard to expert evidence and these new technologies and further explore the way in which pathologists can use visual aids to assist in getting their message across to the Judge and Jury. The various linguistic perils of delivering oral testimony will also be discussed together with the risks associated with uncertainty, ‘just my opinion' and getting it wrong! Quality assurance systems now mandatory in all medical laboratories to assure the quality of the laboratories results have yet to find an official place with respect to forensic pathology testimony. Given the new technologies now being implemented in forensic pathology how long can this state of affairs continue?