This preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.
This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: Science and the Law Science is being used increasingly in litigation and increasingly scientists are being called upon to testify as expert witnesses. This means that scientists and their science are under increasing scrutiny. What are the areas of contention between science and the law? What are the responsibilities of scientists when they are called upon to testify? Issue Overview from http://www.defendingscience.org/courts/supreme_court_decisions.cfm Three major U.S. Supreme Court decisions address expert testimony, including evidence presented by scientific experts. In June 1993 the Supreme Court, in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. , directed federal judges to act as “gatekeepers” with respect to expert testimony. Prior to Daubert , most federal and state court judges relied on two standards to decide if expert testimony was admissible: relevance (if the testimony addressed a fact at issue in the case and if it would be helpful to the jury) and "general acceptance," a concept established in the 1923 Frye ruling, which held that the methods used by an expert in forming his scientific conclusions must be "generally accepted" in his field of expertise....
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 01/15/2012 for the course BSC 3402 taught by Professor Brockmann,h during the Fall '08 term at University of Florida.
- Fall '08