HISTORY OF EXPERT WITNESS

Question 1

Earl Ferrers 1760

Answer 1

• first use of expert witness to give opinion on sanity
• lay witnesses used to testify to changes in behaviour = FACT
• expert witness (surgeon) gave his opinion on whether Earl Ferrers was insane based on the factual evidence

Question 2

Folkes v Chadd 1782

Answer 2

• first documented civil case
• engineer used to give evidence on why a harbour had deteriorated
• judge thought opinion of engineer was proper evidence due to his expertise
• ‘the opinion of scientific men upon proven facts may be given by men of science within their own science’

Question 3

R v Silverlock 1894

Answer 3

• issues with how the witness acquired their expertise

- thought that whether the witness was skilled is more important than how the witness acquired that skill

Question 4

Davie v Magistrates of Edinburgh 1953

Answer 4

• expert gave evidence on shockwaves after blasting
• court stated even if expert evidence is not opposed, the court does not have to accept it
• court decides the ultimate issue, expert provides evidence to allow court to reach a conclusion on this issue
• underlined the need for expert evidence to be intelligible and tested

Question 5

R v Turner 1975

Answer 5

• expert gives evidence outside knowledge of lay person

- if within lay understanding, there is no need for an expert

Question 6

Whitehouse v Jordan 1981

Answer 6

• necessary that expert evidence presented to court is independent product of expert
• expert evidence should not be influenced by whichever party requested the evidence

Question 7

Lord Justice Cresswell 1993

Answer 7

• reiterated the role of the expert witness
• summarised role of expert witness, their duties and responsibilities:
• should state facts of only their opinion
• should provide independent assistance to court, never assume role of advocate
• must state limitations of research
• expert should make it clear if question outwith area of expertise

Question 8

Gallileo’s Revenge - Peter Huber 1992

Answer 8

• scientists can aid, but if conclusions based on poor methodology the opposite is true
• better control in relation to admissibility
• science should be based on valid, scientific research and not overstate