Abstract
Abstract This chapter examines the rules of evidence governing the admissibility of expert evidence in criminal trials, focusing on the ways in which English evidence law does, or might, set reliability standards for the scientific techniques that form the basis of expert testimony in the courts. It argues that English law should construct a reliability-based exclusionary rule for expert evidence. It also presents admissibility rules in other countries such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and United States. It explores the broad differences between the English and American Law, suggesting that at least for criminal cases, Daubert is a useful tool for examining the reliability of expert evidence. It sets the stage for an evaluation of the general justifications for exclusionary rules. It presents the logic of exclusionary rules and the justification of the exclusion of expert evidence.
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.
