1 / 13

ATTACKING SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE

ATTACKING SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE. Professor Ed Imwinkelried. THE PARADOX. The increasing using of expert testimony at trial VS. The alarming insights into the margin of error in expert testimony. THE LARGE NUMBER OF POTENTIAL ATTACKS. The Methods of Attacking Scientific Evidence

khalil
Download Presentation

ATTACKING SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ATTACKING SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE Professor Ed Imwinkelried

  2. THE PARADOX The increasing using of expert testimony at trial VS. The alarming insights into the margin of error in expert testimony

  3. THE LARGE NUMBER OF POTENTIAL ATTACKS The Methods of Attacking Scientific Evidence (5th ed. 2014)

  4. THE USES OF WITNESSES WHO HAPPEN TO BE EXPERTS --To testify to observed facts FRE 602 --To testify to lay opinions FRE 701 --To lecture about a general theory or technique FRE 702 (“or otherwise”) --To testify to an opinion derived by applying a general theory or technique to the facts of the case FRE 702 the syllogism

  5. THE SYLLOGISTIC STRUCTURE OF THE TYPICAL EXPERT’S DIRECT ---The witness’s qualification as an expert ---The validity of the general theory or technique (the major premise) ---The trustworthiness of the information about the case-specific facts (the minor premise) ---The application of the theory or technique to the case-specific facts ---The opinion (the conclusion)

  6. TARGET #1: THE WITNESS’S ALLEGED EXPERTISE An admissibility attack A stronger showing of the relevance of the witness’s qualifications to the specific issue before the court A weight attack The witness is a “Jack of all Trades.”

  7. TARGET #2: THE WITNESS’S CREDIBILITY An admissibility attack The importance of FRE 104(a) A weight attack A two-phase attack exposing the witness’s bias

  8. TARGET #3: THE WITNESS’S MAJOR PREMISE An admissibility attack Fujii, 152 F.Supp.2d 939 (N.D.Ill. 2000) Critically evaluating four aspects of the underlying empirical data A weight attack “The path not taken”

  9. TARGET #4: THE MINOR PREMISE An admissibility attack FRE 703 Williams, 132 S.Ct. 2221 (2012) A weight attack Outflanking the expert

  10. TARGET #5: THE APPLICATION OF THE MAJOR PREMISE TO THE MINOR An admissibility attack FRE 702(d) A weight attack Reasoning by mental health experts –DSM V (5th ed. 2013) Reasoning by toxicologists—differential diagnosis (etiology)

  11. TARGET #6: THE WITNESS’S FINAL CONCLUSION An admissibility attack Forensic metrology – the need for confidence intervals A weight attack The lack of population frequency data The lack of baseline data

  12. TRIAL STRATEGY Admissibility How many targets? Weight How many targets? How many attacks on the target?

  13. CONCLUSION In the final analysis, the scientific method is essentially “commonsense writ large.” Sir Karl Popper, The Logic of Scientific Discovery 22 (1959)

More Related