History of Expert Witness

Question 1

‘forensis’

Answer 1

“pertaining to the court”

“in open court”

Question 2

forensic

Answer 2

relating to the court and legal system

Question 3

forensic expert or expert witness

Answer 3

relating your role to the court

Question 4

history of forensic science

Answer 4

pictures of finger prints - pre-700BC
Julius Caesar - Rome 44BC 
1st Century AD -  Quintilian 
1235 -  Sun Tzu 
1248 - China 
17th Century - The Enlightenmnet 
1880 - Henry Faulds 
FoAnth - late comer

Question 5

Julius Caesar

Answer 5

Rome 44BC
First juridicial PM examination
Antistius’ report - first case of an expert witness report giving rise to the term ‘forensic’

Question 6

1st Century AD Quintilian

Answer 6

demonstrated a bloody handprint had been left as a frame, thereby proving a man innocent

Question 7

1235 - Sun Tzu

Answer 7

Sun Tzu and the bloody sickle demonstrated an understanding of the behaviour of flies in relation to blood. The first successful use of entomology in modern court was in 18th century France.

Question 8

1248 - China

Answer 8

first pathology text book = ‘The Washing Away of Wrongs’

Question 9

17th Century - The Enlightenment

Answer 9

saw a real rise in scientific advances

Question 10

1880 - Henry Faulds

Answer 10

wrote a paper suggesting fingerprints at a scene can identify a perpetrator

Question 11

Forensic anthropology

Answer 11

The application of anthropological expertise to a legal setting. Relates to the application of scientific methods and techniques to the investigation of crime, relating to the courts of law.

Question 12

Jurisdictions

Answer 12

authority given by law to the court to try cases and rule on legal matters within a particular geographic area and/ or over certain types of legal cases. Each jurisdiction will have differences in the ways in which the courts are related and work.

Question 13

Expert witness in jurisdictions

Answer 13

Specificities may vary but the underlying role of the expert witness remains the same.

Question 14

2 common types of legal system

Answer 14

adversarial - court is referee

inquisitorial - judge plays active role in investigation

Question 15

Court

Answer 15

physical environment where trials take place
involves the judiciary, other legal professions and police
civil or criminal

Question 16

civil court

Answer 16

resolves disputes between civilians

Question 17

criminal court

Answer 17

resolves disputes between civilians and the state

Question 18

which court would a forensic anthropologist most likely be found in

Answer 18

criminal court

Question 19

what do experts work from

Answer 19

legislation and case law

Question 20

what legislation do experts work from

Answer 20

criminal procedural rules 2015 and 2018 amendments

Question 21

what case law do experts work from

Answer 21

e.g. Frye and Daubert criteria

Question 22

2 types of witnesses found in court

Answer 22

lay (provide evidence of fact)

expert (allowed to give opinion)

Question 23

History of the use of experts: the two ways experts were introduced in a court

Answer 23

1. to select jurymen who were themselves considered to have a degree of skill/knowledge in the issues to be discussed
2. call on skilled persons to give their opinion to the court to aid the court

Question 24

Early cases involving an expert witness

Answer 24

Earl Ferrers 1760
Folkes vs Chadd 1782
R. v Silverlock 1894 (R v Bunnis 1964)
Davie v Magistrates of Edinburgh 1953

Question 25

Earl Ferrers 1760

Answer 25

earliest case using expert witness defence of insanity lay witness testified changes in behavious surgeon called in to give his opinion on whether Lord Ferrers was insane based on the evidence given by other witnesses

Question 26

Folkes vs Chadd 1782

Answer 26

first civil case to use expert witness engineer gave evidence on why a harbour had deteriorated opinion from engineer was proper evidence because of his expertise which was based on the study of facts - entitled to opinion as long as you stay within your area of expertise

Question 27

R. v Silverlock 1894 (R v Bunnis 1964)

Answer 27

handwriting analysis, but issue centred on how witness acquired his expertise Lord Russell CJ - more important the expert is skill rather than how they became to be skilled R v Bunnis - further developed - test of expertness is skill and skill alone, in their field

Question 28

Lord Justice Cresswell - 1993 Case

Answer 28

reiterated and summarised the role of the expert witness and their duties and responsibilities

Question 29

Duties of the expert witness

Answer 29

- Expert evidence should be independent of and uninfluenced by the party instructing the opinion - An expert witness should provide independent assistance to the court by way of unbiased opinion on matters within his expertise - An expert witness should state the facts or assumptions on which their opinion is based and should not omit material which detract from the concluded opinion - An expert should make it clear when a question is out-with their area of expertise - An expert must state when their opinion is not properly research due to insufficient available data and indicate that the opinion is no more than a provisional one

Question 30

Modern definition of an expert

Answer 30

anyone with knowledge or experience in a particular field or discipline beyond that expected of a layman. EW makes his knowledge and experience available to the court to help it understand the issues and reach a sound and just decision

Question 31

issues with expert witnesses

Answer 31

seen as people of science, science doesn't always solve the problem

Question 32

Junk Science

Answer 32

Peter Huber 1992 - 'Galileo's revenge, junk science in the courtroom'. Lawyers use junk science Argues for better control in relation to admissibility and for more responsible use of science in the court room

Question 33

Issues with the use of the expert witness - Lord Wolff 1996 interim report

Answer 33

- Taking the role of partisan advocates and not neutral fact finders - Delay in receiving their reports and finding dates for them to attend court - Solicitors are too selective, only choosing the most senior in a field - Difficult for the court to exclude evidence totally - Can be pressed by instructing solicitors to ‘improve’ their reports - Experts stray out-with their field of expertise

Question 34

Miscarriages of justice

Answer 34

due to unreliable or improper forensic science use of DNA and development of technology has exposed miscarriages of justice The Innocence Report

Question 35

The Innocence Report

Answer 35

Neufel and Scheck 1992 - exonerating the wrongfully committed 365 DNA exonerations 45% because of misapplication of forensic science - lack of scientific rigour for forensic techniques, improper application of techniques and tests, improperly conveying results in court and repots and fabricating results

Question 36

NAS Report 2009

Answer 36

"Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States" - end product of 3 years of research and testimony - exposed issues within forensic science - identified what was required to improve scientific research - with the exception of DNA analysis, no forensic method shows correlation between evidence and a individual

Question 37

Methods highlighted in the NAS report

Answer 37

- Handwriting - Firearms/ bullets - Tool marks - Bite marks - Fingerprints - Footwear impressions

Question 38

Problems with forensic science as highlighted by the NAS report

Answer 38

- Subjective analysis - Lack of science - Inter-observer error - Anecdotal evidence in the court room - Lack of admitted error due to research - Lack of fundamental science

Question 39

Outcome of the NAS report

Answer 39

13 recommendations - Standardise terminology and practices - Expand research on the accuracy, reliability and validity of forensic sciences - Independence of forensic science services for the control of law enforcement agencies - Support research on human observer bias and sources of error - Establish a national code of ethics

Question 40

PCAST Report 2016

Answer 40

Same concerns in NAS report were reiterated and expanded upon ‘Forensic Science in Criminal Courts: Ensuring Scientific Validity of Feature Comparison Methods’ Conducted by Presidential Council of Advisors on Science and Technology Written in response to Obama's question (any further steps to ensure validity) Examined research underlying specific feature comparison disciplines Identified 2 gaps

Question 41

2 gaps in feature comparison disciplines identified in PCAST report 2016

Answer 41

``` 1 = the need for clarity about the scientific standards for the validity and reliability of forensic methods 2 = The need to evaluate specific forensic methods to determine whether they have been scientifically established to be valid and reliable ```

Question 42

Recommendations of report included

Answer 42

- The introduction of evaluations of the scientific methodology of current and future technologies - Directing legal professionals to ensure that expert testimony used was based on valid methods - Better resources to support the judicial training in the evaluation of forensic evidence

Question 43

Recommendations of report included

Answer 43

- The introduction of evaluations of the scientific methodology of current and future technologies - Directing legal professionals to ensure that expert testimony used was based on valid methods - Better resources to support the judicial training in the evaluation of forensic evidence