Abstract
Last summer's Supreme Court decision that changed the ground rules governing the admission of scientific evidence in trials generated fears that the wave of junk science that had threatened to overwhelm the nation's courtrooms in recent years would grow to tidal proportions (see page 43). So far that hasn't happened, said Richard B. Racine during the American Chemical Society's national meeting in San Diego. Racine, a partner at Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner in Washington, D.C., spoke at a symposium titled The Importance of Technology to Legal Decision-Making, sponsored by the ACS Division of Chemistry and the Law. In June 1993, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously in the case of Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals that the proper test of whether scientific evidence is admissible in a court of law is spelled out in rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence enacted by Congress in 1975 (C&EN, July 12, 1993, page 20). Basically, ...
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
