Expert Witness In Court Research Articles

Awareness of forensic odontology among police personnel: A new ray of hope in forensic odontology.

Background:Police personnel play an important role in collecting and producing evidence. Knowledge about the various aspects of forensic as well as dental sciences and related evidence in them provide a golden opportunity to forensic odontologists to actively participate in the identification of the accused or victim. They can also act as an expert witness in court to produce forensic dental evidence.Aim:To evaluate the awareness and knowledge about the utilization of forensic odontology during evidence collection by the crime scene investigation (CSI) officers.Materials and Methods:Four hundred police officers were included in this survey. A questionnaire was designed to assess the awareness and knowledge about forensic odontology and application of the known knowledge in identifying and considering the dental evidences. Data were analyzed using the software Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS, Chicago, Il, USA) version 17.0 by comparing the overall awareness of forensic odontology among the trained SI officers and trainee police personnel.Results:The collected results showed that there is a requirement for changes in the current practice of evidence collection and highlighted the need for better communication between the police personnel and forensic odontologists. A significantly higher number of police officers in both the trained and trainee groups reported knowledge about the subject (P < 0.001) through newspapers and mass media as the sources of knowledge.Conclusion:Even though the respondents have knowledge about forensic odontology, there is a lack of communication and facilities in their system; hence, steps must be taken to educate the police personnel about the application of forensic odontology.

Ethical issues on forensic-psychiatric examinations

Summary Usually forensic psychiatrists are concerned with the assessment of complex cases, including risk assessment, and act as expert witnesses in court, commenting on issues such as competency to stand trial and criminal responsibility. This article reviews the relevant forensic-psychiatric literature about the role of a forensic psychiatrist. While the ethical issues facing forensic psychiatrists may be similar across cultures, they also depend on the specific legal system and service provision within each country. Therefore, a forensic psychiatrist should look not only to technical guidelines to structure her report, but should also respect the ethical frame of her country in order to be conscious of the cultural and societal context. The concepts of “criminal responsibility” or “guilt” in legal thinking are discussed on the basis of the regulations in Germany. These concepts do not exist as an empirical entity in psychiatry. Even if a psychiatric expert does not comment directly on criminal responsibility – as or she should not do – her expert opinion aims at enabling this finding. The forensic psychiatrist acting as expert witness is confronted with a double dilemma: either she is legitimating punishment by labelling only a fraction of the accused as disordered and in need of treatment; in which case she might be called a servant of justice, or, if she is offering treatment for a large number of offenders, she might be accused of brain washing and treatment tyranny. As a matter of principle, forensic psychiatrists and forensic psychologists should not, in order to avoid a conflict of roles, assess their own patients. Their task is the psychopathological analysis of the mental condition of a perpetrator and her personality performed on the basis of empirical knowledge and competent specialist examination. Regarding risk assessment, future behaviour cannot be predicted with any certainty no matter how sophisticated the instruments. This gives rise to particular challenges in balancing the civil liberties of the patient with the protection of the public from (potential) future harm by that patient. In an increasingly risk-aversive society, public pressure demands a reduction in false negative predictions with the ultimate goal of eliminating risk. Although the legality of commitment and of compulsory treatment depends entirely on the label “capacity to consent”, there is no standardized and validated tool to assess this capacity. In medical praxis, the capacity to consent is often evaluated rather formally or is based on personal psychiatric experience. Despite discomfort, contradictions and resistance, psychiatrists should not retreat from the forensic field. Psychiatrists should continue to work on humanizing the management of offenders and on facilitating suitable treatment for those in need. This highlights the need for ongoing cooperation with the legal system, which allows for contributing experiences that may be helpful in the further development of the law despite the many questions referring to the dual-role dilemma and compulsory treatment that remain unanswered. It is, however, always important to be watchful regarding attempts to instrumentalise forensic psychiatry.

An evaluation of a new tool to aid judgements of credibility in the medico-legal setting

Purpose Clinical psychologists and other health professionals are often requested to act as expert witnesses in Court. They are required to assess, and report upon, the reliability of the accounts of physical and psychological symptoms made by their clients. This study investigated the effectiveness of a checklist drawing upon relevant literature on lying and malingering to aid the detection of exaggeration of physical symptoms. Method Sixty-four participants were cast as interviewers and assigned to either a ‘checklist’ or ‘no checklist’ condition. Another 64 volunteers were assigned to either a ‘truth teller’ or ‘malingerer’ role and, after undergoing a cold pressor procedure, were interviewed about their experience. The interviewers with a checklist drawn from the literature were asked to rate the presence of 28 checklist items on 5-point Likert scales and to indicate whether or not they believed their interviewee was truthful or exaggerating his or her symptoms. The interviewers without the checklist were asked to simply indicate whether their interviewee was truthful or exaggerating. Results Evaluators who were not given the checklist did not classify their interviewees at a level significantly better than chance. Those using the checklist achieved an overall hit rate of 70%. Signal detection analysis supported the finding that those with the checklist showed greater discriminability. Nine checklist items significantly discriminated between truth tellers and malingerers. Furthermore, the total checklist score was significantly higher for exaggerated accounts than for truthful accounts. Conclusions Results suggest that a checklist based on the literatures into lying and malingering warrants further investigation. Such a tool would be useful as an aid for expert witnesses called to provide informed opinion on the likelihood that a claimant is exaggerating, malingering or otherwise misrepresenting difficulties.

Psychologists and psychiatrists serving as expert witnesses in court: what do they know about eyewitness memory?

Expert witnesses have various tasks that frequently include issues of memory. We tested if expert witnesses outperform other practitioners on memory issues of high relevance to clinical practice. We surveyed psychiatrists and psychologists who reported serving as expert witnesses in court (n = 117) about their knowledge and beliefs about human memory. The results were compared to a sample of psychiatrists and psychologists who had never served as expert witnesses (n = 819). Contrary to our expectations, the professionals serving as expert witnesses did not outperform the practitioners who never served. A substantial minority of the respondents harbored scientifically unproven ideas of human memory on issues such as the memory of small children, repression of adult traumatic memories, and recovered traumatic childhood memories. We conclude that the expert witnesses are at risk of offering bad recommendations to the court in trials where reliability of eyewitness memory is at stake.

Introduction: Evidence and Causality in the Sciences

Causality is a vibrant and thriving topic in philosophy of science. It is closely related to many other challenging scientific concepts, such as probability and mechanisms, which arise in many different scientific contexts, in different fields. For example, probability and mechanisms are relevant to both causal inference (finding out what causes what) and causal explanation (explaining how a cause produces its effect). They are also of interest to fields as diverse as astrophysics, biochemistry, biomedical and social sciences. At the same time, there has been an explosion of interest in evidence, most obviously in biomedical contexts with the rise of ‘evidence-based medicine’, but also elsewhere, such as in social science. What is evidence? How do we decide what our best sources of evidence are? This topos examines the relation between causality and evidence in different scientific areas. This involves questions about the foundations of the sciences, e.g. what is evidence and how does it contribute to causal knowledge? But it also involves questions about specific applications, e.g. how should we best deal with the many problems of evidence given by expert witnesses in court; and questions about policy-making, e.g. what constitutes evidence of causation that is relevant to the design of socio-economic and public health policies? These questions are all of immense current concern. Pressure on health systems from challenges such as ageing populations and the obesity epidemic, coupled with severe financial constraints on public policy, means governments are demanding answers with increasing urgency. The time is ripe for a thorough discussion on causality and evidence. The contributions collected here are but the starting point, and we hope they will inspire many other scholars to engage with these topics, from either a philosophical or scientific angle.

Teaching forensic psychiatry in Europe

Forensic psychiatry was long regarded as sufficiently defined by the laws of a country to be restricted by national boundaries in all but a few areas. European Union (EU) employment rights and travel facilities have changed that within the EU. The goal of this research is to explore the role and development of a network of teachers and trainees in forensic psychiatry. European Union countries differ widely in the extent to which they recognise forensic psychiatry as a specialty and thus also in the amount of training clinicians receive before they present themselves as expert witnesses in court, or develop or run services, or manage and treat individual offender patients. Nevertheless, a summer seminar for practicing clinicians, who also present evidence to court and for bodies considering discharge of potentially dangerous patients, has proved a useful forum for joint 'European learning'. Participants have left with a sense of improved understanding of their own law and practices as well as new perspectives on what works for offenders with mental disorder.

Partial confessions of an expert court witness in the prosecution and defence of alleged drug offences

PurposeThis article seeks to provide an insight into the work of an expert witness working in drug trials in Crown courts.Design/methodology/approachThe approach is a case study of a single expert witness, drawing on experiences over several years.FindingsThe evidence produced in court is subject to the personal limitations and organisational constraints of the experts involved. Prosecution often relies on unreliable and secretive sources. It is important to increase transparency and for a robust challenge to be made to some claims. Many experts are former police officers who are rarely objective or neutral, hence the need for independent experts from within the field.Research limitations/implicationsPersonal experience cannot always be generalised so limits the information presented in this case study.Practical implicationsThe role of expert witness is a career development opportunity for people working in the drugs and alcohol field.Social implicationsIt is important to understand the subjective way in which testimony and evidence is produced.Originality/valueThis paper gives a rare insight into a key aspect of the legal process.

Presenting evidence for the court

The medical doctor is sometimes called upon to serve in the courts as expert witness. The work is challenging and has serious implications for the legal and justice system. The outcome of a case may adversely affect the lives of real people when the evidence is not presented appropriately. However, there is reluctance from doctors to participate in the court process. The health professional may not be trained in the art of being a court witness and while scientifically qualified, may not provide the due diligence in explaining the issues properly to the members of the court. Some of the issues that may affect the outcome of a legal case include late discovery of conflicts of interest, inability to communicate well and stick to scientific facts, the inefficiencies of the legal system, and testifying against a medical colleague. There is merit to recommend that all medical doctors must undergo theoretical and practical training when presented as expert witness in courts. Five cases are presented here as illustrations of doctors involved in court cases.

Collaboration: The Paradigm of Practice Approach between the Forensic Psychiatrist and the Forensic Psychologist

The importance and relevance of forensic practice to societal evolution has increased exponentially in recent years. As society evolves in its understanding of the complex relationships between mankind and society, we rely more and more on the services of forensic experts. This article elucidates the professions of forensic psychiatry and forensic psychology. We examine the two distinct professions from the spectrum of collaboration, integration of services, differences, and similarities. We also compare and contrast the educational background and training requirements for these two professions; and present illustrative scenarios and real life examples of the daily functions of both professionals. Lastly, we present demographic data for the areas of employment, numbers, and geographic distribution of the two professions. Forensic psychiatry is the interface between medicine and law, while forensic psychology is the interface between psychology and law. As such, these professions are mired with complexities and challenged by vulnerabilities. Professionals from both fields can serve as expert witnesses in court and therefore face similar challenges in their course of professional practice. Collaboration between these two professions has the potential to increase both the credibility and utility of forensic services to the courts, the individuals served, and the general public.

The role of the expert witness in court

No abstact

Teaching psychology to jurists: Initiatives and reactions prior to World War I.

This article deals with the kind of psychology suggested for jurists that was thought to be necessary training for their work. An analysis of the content of two textbooks by Otto Lipmann and Karl Marbe reveals that such teaching activity involves two different levels of historical analysis. On the one hand, it relates to experimental research done by psychologists on law-related issues; on the other, it concerns the professional experience psychologists accumulated by acting as expert witnesses in court. The paper investigates how psychologists presented psychology to jurists, which methods and theories they suggested as being essential for juristic training and professional performance, and whether jurists appreciated these materials and efforts. These inquiries are embedded in the debate on the history of criminal psychology, taking into account the European, particularly the German, context. The author shows how specific historical developments led to an increased exchange between experimental psychology and criminal law during the first decades of the 20th century.

Knowing the Social in Urban Planning Law Decision-Making

This article reflects an interest in how policy and law are used to develop models for more just and equitable city planning. Making use of a law in action rather than a law in books approach, the article draws on socio-legal scholarship and urban studies to consider knowledge formats for planning law decision-makers (PLDM) in relation to social and cultural impacts for proposals for significant land use and development. Of interest is how PLDM know about social and cultural impacts and what role their own social capital plays in regard to this knowledge. The place for social impact assessment (SIA), as a legal actor and knowledge instrument in the decision-making process is considered. Some models are suggested for how social facts, which carry a troubled history in common law jurisdictions, could be presented as evidence by the planning expert witness in courts and tribunals.

Inference with legal evidence: common sense is necessary, but not sufficient.

Recent cases have highlighted the issue of faulty probabilistic reasoning by expert witnesses in courts of law. While concern about potential miscarriages of justice is clearly well-placed, the consequences of such faulty reasoning do not seem to be fully appreciated. These are often counter-intuitive, as we show with two examples: the Interrogator's Fallacy and the Prosecutor's Fallacy. Both demonstrate the danger of relying solely on 'common sense' when drawing inferences from legal evidence.

Exotic Dance Adult Entertainment: ethnography challenges false mythology

It is a myth that crime and property depreciation are tbe inevitable consequences of the presence in a community of exotic dance adult entertainment (also referred to as erotic, nude or topless dancing, striptease, gentlemen's clubs, juice bars and adult cabarets). Nevertheless, this myth has been perpetuated by media sensationalism, vocal minorities of the Religious Right and the feminist movement, the misinformed, “studies” commissioned by various localities, the justice system and even a professional association. As grounds for regulation of this entertainment, localities have used “studies” showing adverse effects that are scientifically flawed and now chaUengeable. My ethnographic work since 1995, when i was asked to be an expert court witness in First Amendment cases related to exotic dance, has been part of that challenge. This article examines a recent American Planning Association publication that perpetuates the same misconceptions under the cloak of academic professionalism. The critique serves as a springboard to discuss the role of planners in local governance, whose recommendations can affect the vitality of communities and the livelihoods of individuals, provoke costly litigation at taxpayer expense and infringe people's civil liberties. [Exotic dance, cultural conflict, urban planning, myth]

(Mis) Representations of the Long-Term Effects of Childhood Sexual Abuse in the Courts

SUMMARY This study addresses the (mis) representations made by pro-false memory attorneys and expert witnesses in court regarding the long-term effects of childhood sexual abuse (CSA). Five pro-false memory positions were identified: (1) there is no causal connection between CSA and adult psychopathology; (2) the evidence is insufficient; (3) CSA does not cause specific trauma-related outcomes like borderline and dissociative identity disorder; (4) other variables than CSA explain the variance of adult psychopathology; and (5) the long-term effects of CSA are general and non-specific. Examining the testimony revealed that such pro-false memory testimony was based solely on a partial understanding of retrospective data and that pro-false memory experts do not cite the more recent prospective data. Reviewing the totality of the scientific evidence demonstrates that such pro-false memory testimony is inaccurate and has the potential of misleading the jury. Prospective studies provide sufficient evidence to causally link CSA to a number of areas of adult psychopathology including multiple, co-morbid psychiatric conditions, and possibly to link early parent-infant attachment pathology to the development of borderline and dissociative identity disorder.

Dance Under the Censorship Watch

During times of changing mores, dance, with its power to arouse, has subversive potential, which leaves it open to negative interpretation regardless of actual intent. The human body is a significant metaphor, and dance may reflect what is and suggest what might be (Douglas 1970, 64; Hanna 1987; Hanna 1988). That the instrument used for both dance and sex is the human body has long made dance suspect or immoral in some people’s eyes. Religious and political leaders worldwide often seek to bridle sexuality in various forms lest it undermine the status quo. Indeed, history attests to periodic bans on dancing as an attempt to guard vigilantly against its “evils” (Davies 1984; Wagner 1997). Baptist, Assemblies of God, and Church of Christ congregations are among the groups that have forbidden all forms of dance. In this article I call attention to the threat to all dance that comes from various forms of censorship, whether the target is the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) or the often stigmatized “exotic” dance, variously referred to as erotic, topless, strip, striptease, show bar, sports bar (with dancers and TV screens), nude, barroom, table, couch, lap, go-go, and gentlemen’s club dance. It should be noted that some “shocking” dances that created public outrage in the past have become classics and influenced the development of dance. Had there been censorship of those dances, our current repertoire would be less vibrant and enriching. The art of dance develops with inspiration from many sources, even those that are sexual and shocking. My continuing research and testimony as an expert court witness on exotic dance was a censorship alert that catalyzed my realization that attacks on publicly funded “high art” dance by the NEA and privately funded “low art/entertainment” exotic dance reflected the same impulse to prohibit that which some people deemed “obscene.” 1

Call for help.

Call for help.

Sexual abuse victimization and the child witness in Canada: Legal, ethical, and professional issues for psychologists.

Abstract Child sexual abuse is a serious and tragic reality. Unfortunately, some children who disclose sexual abuse are revictimized by undergoing countless interviews and through testifying in open court. The Canadian legal system has made a number of significant reforms in the last few decades regarding the rights of child witnesses and, in particular, the rights of those who have disclosed sexual abuse. This paper provides an overview of the law in Canada as it pertains to child sexual abuse victims and witnesses, and reflects on the role and responsibilities of psychologists who work with child witnesses. It reviews the effects of protection reforms and preparation programs on children who must testify, examines some of the current major issues in the research literature in the area of interviewing and assessing sexually abused children, and considers the role of the psychologists as expert witness in court. In addition, it discusses potential ethical dilemmas for psychologists who work with child witnesses, and proposes recommendations for research and clinical practice. Child sexual abuse has become a very serious concern in Canada over the past two decades (Deswirek Sas, Wolfe, & Gowdey, 1996). The increase in known child sexual abuse cases (see Bertrand, Hornick, & Bolitho, 1995; Ceci & Crotteau Huffman, 1997), has led to an increase in research on the effects of the disclosure process on young children. Although children may act as witnesses in a variety of situations, child sexual abuse victims are the ones most often in contact with the justice system (Yuille, 1988). Many child witness reforms have been specifically designed to protect child sexual abuse victims. Very few children actually have to appear in court (approximately 5% of those children who disclose abuse) as most sexual abuse cases are resolved by plea bargaining during the first year after the allegations are made. Resolution by trial, however, can take up to 12 to 16 months (Martone, Jaudes, & Cavins, 1996). As a result, many researchers and clinicians have shown concern for the stress that child victims may endure for potentially long periods after disclosure, and have advocated for reforms to protect and educate child witnesses (e.g., see Deswirek Sas et al., 1996). Indeed, some of the recent changes in the legal system were created to protect children from the court system. Other reforms were aimed at empowering, or educating, child witnesses about the court process as a means of reducing the stress involved in testifying. Children's testimony, however, is of limited value unless it is perceived as credible (Cashmore & Bussey, 1996). Thus, child witness reforms allow more flexible rules of evidence, even when a child is the only witness to a crime. Traditionally, psychologists have been mainly involved in the assessment and implementation of services for abused children (Melton & Limber, 1989); more recently, they have become more involved in the process of forensic investigation and related court proceedings (Pearce, 1990). In this paper I review a number of important issues for mental health professionals who work with child witnesses, particularly those children who have disclosed sexual abuse. I begin with an overview of Canadian federal and provincial child witness reforms, and then examine the issues, current research and laws related to: (a) protecting and empowering child witnesses, (b) interviewing children about abuse, and (c) the role mid ethical responsibilities of the psychologist as expert witness. Background: Canada Acknowledges the Rights of the Child Witness Until the 1980s, children rarely appeared as witnesses in Canadian courts. Children were typically viewed as inaccurate sources of evidence, unable to distinguish fantasy from reality (Yuille, 1988). During the 1980s, Canada experienced dramatic changes in its societal awareness and understanding of child sexual abuse, largely as a result of the Badgley Report (Badgley, 1984). …

New opportunities for expert witnesses in court

New opportunities for expert witnesses in court

030. The medical practitioner as an expert witness in court

030. The medical practitioner as an expert witness in court