ADMISSIBILITY OF EXPERT EVIDENCE Flashcards
1
Q
Frye 1923
A
- Dr Brown murdered by office in James Frye
- Defence brought in lie detector test which said Frye telling the truth when he denied the murder
- evidence disallowed because it wasn’t a generally accepted technique
- lead to production of Frye Standard - General Acceptance test = test to determine admissibility of scientific evidence
- did not clarify admissibility issue, only placed onus on judge to decide admissibility, lead to admission of junk science
2
Q
Daubert v Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals 1992
A
- 2 boys born with birth defects, parents believed it was due to drug Benedictin so sued MDP
- MDP produced research showing no proven side effects of this type from published scientific study
- petitioners provided evidence that disagreed from animal studies, pharmaceutical studies and unpublished human studies
- court did not allow petitioner’s evidence under Frye’s General Acceptance Test
- plaintiffs appealed decision, asked supreme court to review judgement
- supreme court accepted appeal deciding the Federal Rules superseded Frye
- supreme court then interpreted the language used in rule 702 which became known as Daubert Guidelines
3
Q
What do the Daubert guidelines change?
A
- shifts focus from conclusion to methodology used to reach conclusion
- evaluate reliability and relevance of expert testimony
4
Q
What are the Daubert guidelines?
A
Content of testimony must:
- be testable and been tested using scientific method
- have been subject to peer review
- have established standards
- have known/potential error rates
- have widespread general acceptance within the scientific community
5
Q
What is the scientific method described by the Daubert guidelines?
A
- ask a question
- do background research
- construct a hypothesis
- test hypothesis experimentally
- analyse data and draw conclusions
- communicate results
6
Q
General Electric Company v Joiner 1997
A
- questioned whether the abuse of discretion standard is correct to apply when considering admissibility of expert testimony
- helped articulate Daubert guidelines
7
Q
Kumho Tyre Ltd. v Carmichael 1999
A
- applied Daubert guidelines to expert witness from non-scientisits
- stated that Daubert guidelines can be applied to all expert witnesses on a case by case basis with degree of flexibility
- allows for novel evidence types
8
Q
Federal Rules 1957, 2000
A
- federal rules established in 1957 but updated in 2000 to standardise the trial process
- rule 702 particularly focused on admissibility of expert witness testimony
- updated to include if clause - expert testimony admissible IF:
- based on scientific facts or data
- its the product of reliable principles and methods
- the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case
9
Q
Common Law Criteria (UK)
A
- guidelines on admissibility of expert evidence in UK based on cases with the emphasis on the expert rather than their methodologies
- R v Turner - expert testimony must assist judge and jury to understand facts outwith knowledge of layperson
- Queen v Bonython - expert must have relevant expertise
- Civil case law - expert must be impartial, objective and within field of expertise
10
Q
Law Commission Report 2011 (UK)
A
- proposed strengthening of common law criteria
- expert opinion evidence is admissible only if court is satisfied it is reliable
- evidence is only reliable if:
- it is presented on sound principles, techniques and assumptions
- those principles, techniques and assumptions have been properly applied to the case
- evidence is supported by those principles, techniques and assumptions
11
Q
HMA v YOUNG, 2014, Scotland
A
- stated expert evidence must be based on recognised and developed academic discipline
- must proceed on theories that have been tested
- be found to have a practical and measurable consequence in real life
- follow a developed method which is open to change
- produce a result capable of being assessed
- will not admit expert evidence unless it is sufficiently reliable and assist finder of fact in determination of the issue
12
Q
Lord Chief Justice 2014 Kalisher Lecture
A
-stated the credibility of the criminal justice system depends on the quality of the science underpinning the forensic evidence in order to preserve the confidence in the experts
13
Q
Criminal Procedure Rules 2015
A
- gives courts explicit powers to manage preparation of criminal cases and eliminate unfair and avoidable delays
- restructured in 2015, part 19 added which specifically refers to expert evidence
- outlines the experts duty to the court and content of experts report as:
- giving an opinion which is objective, unbiased and within area of expertise
- actively assisting the court in fulfilling its duty of case management by complying with directions and informing the court of failure to do so
- informing all parties and court if opinion changes from that contained in the report served as evidence
14
Q
Guidelines of Admissibility of CCTV images by the Attorney General in the US
A
- image must be sufficiently clear so jury can compare with defendant
- when a witness knows defendant well enough to recognise them as the offender in the photo, they can give evidence on this if photo not available to jury
- when a witness who doesn’t know the defendant spends time viewing and analysing images from the scene, can give evidence of ID based on a comparison
- a facial mapping expert can give opinion evidence of ID based on a comparison of images from scene and photo of defendant, provided photos are available to jury
15
Q
R v Grey 2003
A
- facial imaging and mapping as expert evidence
- expert claimed features provided strong correlation to assailant
- but never stated how frequent these features are within general population
- evidence has little backing in strength for admissibility
- judge stated until a database or mathematical formula is created to show probability of features in general population, facial mapping shout be inadmissible
