Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Legal History

PDF

David S Caudill

2013

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Law

Why Judges Applying The Daubert Trilogy Need To Know About The Social, Institutional, And Rhetorical - And Not Just The Methodological - Aspects Of Science, David S. Caudill, Lewis H. Larue Jul 2013

Why Judges Applying The Daubert Trilogy Need To Know About The Social, Institutional, And Rhetorical - And Not Just The Methodological - Aspects Of Science, David S. Caudill, Lewis H. Larue

David S Caudill

In response to the claim that many judges are deficient in their understanding of scientific methodology, this Article identifies in recent cases (1) a pragmatic perspective on the part of federal appellate judges when they reverse trial judges who tend to idealize science (i.e., who do not appreciate the local and practical goals and limitations of science), and (ii) an educational model of judicial gatekeeping that results in reversal of trial judges who defer to the social authority of science (i.e., who mistake authority for reliability). Next, this Article observes that courts (in the cases it analyzes) are not interested …


Arsenic And Old Chemistry: Images Of Mad Alchemists, Experts Attacking Experts, And The Crisis In Forensic Science, David S. Caudill Jul 2013

Arsenic And Old Chemistry: Images Of Mad Alchemists, Experts Attacking Experts, And The Crisis In Forensic Science, David S. Caudill

David S Caudill

Drawing on research into the use of experts in early 19th-century criminal trials, the image of mad alchemists in popular culture representations of science, and the distinction between empirical and contingent “interpretive repertoires” in the discourse of scientific controversies, this article explores the controversy over arsenic-detection technologies prior to the Marsh test. In addition to noting the predictable criticism of incompetent expertise in the service of law, this article highlights implied accusations of hubris and amorality on the part of over-confident experts, both in the early 19th-century and in today's crisis of forensic science.