Resolution 101C: Expert Witnesses and Jury Understanding
In response to a 2009 report by the National Academy of Sciences, the American Bar Association House of Delegates has recently approved “Resolution 101C”, a resolution that will help jury members to better understand and fairly assess expert witness’ presentations.
“The National Academy raised concerns about the use of terms such as “match,” “consistent with” and “identical,” and said such terms should be defined and standardized. Another problem noted by the Academy is that some forensic practitioners claim their methodologies have perfect accuracy.”
It is important to remember that in any case, experts must present their testimony to the jury in such a way that makes it discernible and clear as to what evidence the research and facts were based upon. For cases that are particularly complex, the court should make every effort to clarify confusing topics or material and allow jurors to ask questions if and when they arise.
If you would like to comment on the performance of an expert witness that you have had experience working with or listened to, Courtroom Insight encourages you to write a review on him or her so that others can use your valuable opinion as a reference. For more information on our review system or to create a user account, please visit Courtroom Insight’s website here. To read the complete article in the ABA Journal, please click here: Resolution Tackles Expert Evidence Issues in Criminal Cases
Source: Weiss, Debra Cassens. “Resolution Tackles Expert Evidence Issues in Criminal Cases.” ABA Journal: Law News Now. February 6, 2012.