This project addressed the admissibility of expert evidence in criminal proceedings in England and Wales. Currently, too much expert opinion evidence is admitted without adequate scrutiny because no clear test is being applied to determine whether the evidence is sufficiently reliable to be admitted. Juries may therefore be reaching conclusions on the basis of unreliable evidence, as confirmed by a number of miscarriages of justice in recent years. Following consultation on a discussion paper (LCCP 190, 2009, ISDBN 9780118404655) the Commission recommends that there should be a new reliability-based admissibility test for expert evidence in criminal proceedings. The test would not need to be applied routinely or unnecessarily, but it would be applied in appropriate cases and it would result in the exclusion of unreliable expert opinion evidence. Under the test, expert opinion evidence would not be admitted unless it was adjudged to be sufficiently reliable to go before a jury. The draft Criminal Evidence (Experts) Bill published with the report (as Appendix A) sets out the admissibility test and also provides the guidance judges would need when applying the test, setting out the key reasons why an expert's opinion evidence might be unreliable. The Bill also codifies (with slight modifications) the uncontroversial aspects of the present law, so that all the admissibility requirements for expert evidence would be set out in a single Act of Parliament and carry equal authority.

The law governing the admissibility of expert evidence in criminal trials is unsatisfactory. If the reliability of expert evidence is in question, there are no clear guide lines for determining whether or not it is sufficiently trustworthy to be considered by the jury. This title makes provisional proposals for reform.

The global nature of crime often requires expert witnesses to work and present their conclusions in courts outside their home jurisdiction with the corresponding need for them to have an understanding of the different structures and systems operating in other jurisdictions. This book will be a resource for UK professionals, as well as those from overseas testifying internationally, as to the workings of all UK jurisdictions. It also will help researchers and students to better understand the UK legal system.

The book is a comprehensive narration of the use of expertise in international criminal trials offering reflection on standards concerning the quality and presentation of expert evidence. It analyzes and critiques the rules governing expert evidence in international criminal trials and the strategies employed by counsel and courts relying upon expert evidence and challenges that courts face determining its reliability. In particular, the author considers how the procedural and evidentiary architecture of international criminal courts and tribunals influences the courts’ ability to meaningfully incorporate expert evidence into the rational fact-finding process. The book provides analysis of the unique properties of expert evidence as compared with other forms of evidence and the challenges that these properties present for fact-finding in international criminal trials. It draws conclusions about the extent to which particularized evidentiary rules for expert evidence in international criminal trials is wanting. Based on comparative analyses of relevant national practices, the book proposes procedural improvements to address some of the challenges associated with the use of expertise in international criminal trials.

Forensic science evidence and expert witness testimony play an increasingly prominent role in modern criminal proceedings. Science produces powerful evidence of criminal offending, but has also courted controversy and sometimes contributed towards miscarriages of justice. The twenty-six articles and essays reproduced in this volume explore the theoretical foundations of modern scientific proof and critically consider the practical issues to which expert evidence gives rise in contemporary criminal trials. The essays are prefaced by a substantial new introduction which provides an overview and incisive commentary contextualising the key debates. The volume begins by placingforensic science in interdisciplinary focus, with contributions from historical, sociological, Science and Technology Studies (STS), philosophical and jurisprudential perspectives. This is followed by closer examination of the role of forensic science and other expert evidence in criminal proceedings, exposing enduring tensions and addressing recent controversies in the relationship between science and criminal law. A third set of contributions considers the practical challenges of interpreting and communicating forensic science evidence. This perennial battle continues to be fought at the intersection between the logic of scientific inference and the psychology of the fact-finder‘scommon sense reasoning. Finally, the volume‘s fourth group of essays evaluates the (limited) success of existing procedural reforms aimed at improving the reception of expert testimony in criminal adjudication, and considers future prospects for institutional renewal - with a keen eye to comparative law models and experiences, success stories and cautionary tales.

Forensic science evidence plays a pivotal role in modern criminal proceedings. Yet such evidence poses intense practical and theoretical challenges. It can be unreliable or misleading and has been associated with miscarriages of justice. In this original and insightful book, a global team of prominent scholars and practitioners explore the contemporary challenges of forensic science evidence and expert witness testimony from a variety of theoretical, practical and jurisdictional perspectives. Chapters encompass the institutional organisation of forensic science, its procedural regulation, evaluation and reform, and brim with comparative insight.

Roberts and Zuckerman's Criminal Evidence is the eagerly-anticipated third of edition of the market-leading text on criminal evidence, fully revised to take account of developments in legislation, case-law, policy debates, and academic commentary during the decade since the previous edition was published. With an explicit focus on the rules and principles of criminal trial procedure, Roberts and Zuckerman's Criminal Evidence develops a coherent account of evidence law which is doctrinally detailed, securely grounded in a normative theoretical framework, and sensitive to the institutional and socio-legal factors shaping criminal litigation in practice. The book is designed to be accessible to the beginner, informative to the criminal court judge or legal practitioner, and thought-provoking to the advanced student and scholar: a textbook and monograph rolled into one. The book also provides an ideal disciplinary map and work of reference to introduce non-lawyers (including forensic scientists and other expert witnesses) to the foundational assumptions and technical intricacies of criminal trial procedure in England and Wales, and will be an invaluable resource for courts, lawyers and scholars in other jurisdictions seeking comparative insight and understanding of evidentiary regulation in the common law tradition.