Expert Witness
An expert can be anyone with extensive knowledge or experience in a unique discipline or professional field beyond that of the average lay person. In a case, if technical, scientific, or other specialized knowledge is determined to be necessary to help to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, an expert witness may be called upon.
Expert witnesses often play an important role in civil litigation by using their experience and knowledge to reach just conclusions.
Experts are often brought in for particular cases. The most common cases that require expert opinion deal with:
Medical Malpractice
Product Liability
Accident Recreation
Construction Accidents
Insurance Claims
Damages Claims
NOTE: Before the
…show more content…
trial begins, expert witnesses are required to compile a report summarizing their analysis & conclusions. This report must be shared with all other parties. What is the role of an expert witness?
Expert witnesses can play a number of vital roles in litigation. An expert may be a consultant or advisor and can work behind the scenes or be called upon in court to give their expert opinions.
Consulting experts are used to investigate facts in a case, which may include researching scientific, technical, or medical concerns that arise. The most important role an expert can play is in helping an attorney and his or her client gain a more thorough comprehension of the expert's area of expertise as it relates to the case at hand. Attorneys then use this knowledge to present their cases.
Experts play particularly important roles in cases involving such issues relating to medical malpractice, where the law leans heavily on medical, technical, or scientific determinations to establish misconduct. This same expert has the ability to later testify at trial, in which case they would be referred to as an expert witness.
What is considered expert evidence?
Expert evidence, in practical terms, is opinion evidence backed by scientifically supported conclusions. Lay witnesses may only give evidence of fact, while experts are free to make connections based on their analysis and vast
experience. While experts are free to draw conclusions, they must still provide as much detail as needed to help the court decide whether the expert’s opinion should be accepted. Generally, expert evidence is considered to be: Factual evidence requiring expertise in its explanation and presentation Clarification or simplification of technical/scientific/medical terms, topics, and cases Factual analysis and interpretation of specific cases relating to to the experts area of expertise Opinions based on facts cited as evidence within the case Finding an Expert Witness Whether you need an expert for consultation or to testify at trial, their qualifications should remain the same. All experts require specialized knowledge, skills, education, and training in an area of expertise, directing relating to the issues specific to your case. Educational credentials may vary from the expert's college degrees to the reputation of the institution that awarded them. At Litili Group, our litigation support team assists in scheduling, and ensures that our experts are available for legal appointments until your case is concluded.
Argument: This is where the attorney gives detail of the legal situations of the client, and relies on the primary and secondary authorities (Statsky, pg. 545).
The reason being, the Supreme Court found that the expert evidence was not only useful, but was required to have a more in-depth understanding of the issues surrounding battered women. The rationale was, without expert testimony most people would be ignorant to spousal abuse. It was thought that without expert testimony, jurors would make assumptions about the stereotypes that may have been popularized by society as well ignore the importance of previous events that led up to the incident. Moreover, the trial judge charged the jurors properly, explaining that as long as there is some admissible evidence to establish the foundation for the expert 's opinion, he cannot subsequently instruct the jury to completely ignore the testimony. The judge also warned the jury that the more the expert relies on facts, not proven in evidence the less weight the jury may attribute to the opinion. Furthermore, expert evidence does not and cannot usurp the jury 's function of deciding whether, in fact, the accused 's perceptions and actions were reasonable. But fairness and the integrity of the trial process demand that the jury have the opportunity to hear that
There are certain standards that the courts use to determine competency. In order to find the accused competent, a court should find out by a preponderance of evidence that the defendant has remarkable ability to consult with his lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational indulgence. The def...
According to the Federal Rule of Evidence 703, an expert may base an opinion on facts or data in the case that the expert has been made aware of or personally observed. If experts in the particular field would reasonably rely on those kinds of facts or data in forming an opini...
The audiologist’s responsibility in a forensic audiology case could involve acting as an expert witness in court to give professional opinion on their field of expertise. Audiologist could be called in during the discovery phase of a lawsuit to perform an independent medical exam pertaining to hearing loss, vestibular issues, or other areas within scope of practice to give professional opinion regarding the diagnosis, possible cause, extend of the injury, best course of treatment, and the patient’s maximum medical recovery. During the pretrial phase, attorneys submit trial briefs to inform the judge of the facts that will be proven, the audiologist’s expert report based on review of the records and complains would also be included. At times, this report could provide enough evidence for a judge to issue a summary judgement to exclude certain party from the lawsuit. Cases that may involve the
The judges that are a part of this group has many different roles, some of which are to issues warrants, making a determination of probable cause in evidence, denying or granting bail to offenders, overseeing trials, making rulings on different motions and even overseeing hearings. The prosecuting attorney is the one who will represent that state in c...
Therefore, the criminal justice system relies on other nonscientific means that are not accepted or clear. Many of forensic methods have implemented in research when looking for evidence, but the methods that are not scientific and have little or anything to do with science. The result of false evidence by other means leads to false testimony by a forensic analyst. Another issue with forensic errors is that it is a challenge to find a defense expert (Giannelli, 2011). Defense experts are required to help the defense attorneys defend and breakdown all of the doubts in the prosecutors scientific findings in criminal cases. Scientific information is integral in a criminal prosecution, and a defense attorney needs to have an expert to assist he/she in discrediting the prosecution (Giannelli,
Fradella, H.F. (2006) Why judges should admit expert testimony on the unreliability of eyewitness testimony. Federal Courts Law Review. Retrieved from http://www.fclr.org/fclr/articles/html/2006/fedctslrev3.pdf
Attorneys ensure that society has a place to seek and obtain justice, giving confidence that restitution and retribution can occur within the law. Attorneys have a difficult job. They must know the laws like they know the back of their hands. Attorneys attend school just as long or even longer than most doctors. They have the difficult job of defending their clients or prosecuting the bad guys.
Psychologist to make an evaluation. The forensic psychologist is neutral through out the evaluation. They can not have open and trusting relationship. Usually in a case where the subject committed a crime he/she might want to say what ever they think the psychologist would want to hear, to make there sentence lighter. So a forensic psychologist must remain neutral. Also the forensic psychologist has to make an accurate evaluation because he has a lot of influence on what would happen to the subject in a court case. Now ...
“Witness for the Prosecution” superbly demonstrated a realist view of the operating procedures in a courtroom. The actors within the courtroom were easy to identify, and the steps transitioned smoothly from the arrest to the reading of the verdict. The murder trial of Leonard Vole provided realistic insight into how laws on the books are used in courtroom proceedings. With the inferior elements noted, the superior element of the court system in “Witness for the Prosecution” was the use of the adversary system. Both sides of the adversary system were flawlessly protrayed when the prosecution and defense squared off in the courtroom.
Witnesses are extremely important to a case and gathering facts. There are many different things that can make a good witness. Some of these things are as listed. First of all I think the most important attribute that a witness must have is honestly. Cases can be corrupted if there are bad witnesses that aren’t telling the truth. Even though a witness is sworn under oath, that doesn’t stop some from giving false statements. A false statement can completely change the entire outcome of a case. Not only is lying under oath wrong it’s also illegal. Giving a false statement and lying under oath in known as perjury (England). Perjury is a serious crime within the court room, if someone is found guilty of committing perjury they could face up to
2007; Wise, Fishman, & Safer, 2009a). These functions are vital because it has been estimated that in 77,000 criminal trials each year in the U.S., eyewitness testimony is the sole or primary evidence of the defendant’s guilt (Wise, R. A., Safer, M. A., & Maro, C. M. 2011, p. 488).
If a person has a problem, that needs to be addressed in a court venue, it is likely that person will bring the problem to an attorney. Competence comes with the ability, of an attorney, to know where to find the answers to their client’s problems. Legal research is the process of finding the key facts of the case, and applying them to the cause of action. Research good case law and match it to the elements in the case. The hope of an attorney is to create an argument in court that is indisputable.
There are many different tasks of a Lawyer that vary according to the legal jurisdictions and type of lawyer one is. Some of the general roles are: