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

Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 4 of 4

Full-Text Articles in Law

Dangerousness And Expertise Redux, Christopher Slobogin Feb 2006

Dangerousness And Expertise Redux, Christopher Slobogin

ExpressO

Civil commitment, confinement under sexual predator laws, and many capital and noncapital sentences depend upon proof of a propensity toward violence. This article discusses the current state of prediction science, in particular the advantages and disadvantages of clinical and actuarial prediction, and then analyzes how the rules of evidence should be interpreted in deciding whether opinions about propensity should be admissible. It concludes that dangerousness predictions that are not based on empirically-derived probability estimates should be excluded from the courtroom unless the defense decides otherwise. This conclusion is not bottomed on the usual concern courts and commentators raise about expert …


Cross-Disciplinary Assessment: Bringing Law Students And Expert Witnesses Together, Judith M. Marychurch Jan 2006

Cross-Disciplinary Assessment: Bringing Law Students And Expert Witnesses Together, Judith M. Marychurch

Faculty of Law - Papers (Archive)

This paper will discuss the author’s experience in instituting an innovative cross-disciplinary assessment task between undergraduate LLB Evidence students and postgraduate Master of Forensic Accounting (MFA) students, in which students participate in a mock witness examination. LLB students act as legal counsel, conducting examination and cross-examination of postgraduate students acting as expert forensic accounting witnesses.


Expertise And Instinct In The Assessment Of Testamentary Capacity, Pamela Champine Jan 2006

Expertise And Instinct In The Assessment Of Testamentary Capacity, Pamela Champine

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.


Same Old, Same Old: Scientific Evidence Past And Present, Edward K. Cheng Jan 2006

Same Old, Same Old: Scientific Evidence Past And Present, Edward K. Cheng

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

For over twenty years, and particularly since the Supreme Court's Daubert' decision in 1993, much ink has been spilled debating the problem of scientific evidence in the courts. Are jurors or, in the alternative, judges qualified to assess scientific reliability? Do courts really need to be concerned about "junk science"? What mechanisms can promote better decision making in scientific cases? Even a cursory scan of the literature shows the recent explosion of interest in these issues, precipitating new treatises, hundreds of articles, and countless conferences for judges, practitioners, and academics.