2321:
753:
responsibilities of expert witnesses are to evaluate potential problems, defects, deficiencies, or errors only when able to fully appreciate a process or system. Expert witnesses are obligated to study the processes prior to making a survey or postpone the assignment prior to potentially missing the target due to lack of specific condition understanding. They are called to testify under the assumption that all the preparation required for a competent evaluation of the process has been made.
86:
3587:
3601:
1343:
149:
45:
1307:(or the procedure) can be suspended in order to allow the experts to study the case and produce their results. More frequently, meetings of experts occur before trial. Experts charge a professional fee which is paid by the party commissioning the report (both parties for joint instructions) although the report is addressed to the court. The fee must not be contingent on the outcome of the case. Expert witnesses may be
1075:, under the Federal Rule of Evidence 702 (FRE), an expert witness must be qualified on the topic of testimony. In determining the qualifications of the expert, the FRE requires the expert have had specialized education, training, or practical experience in the subject matter relating to the case. The expert's testimony must be based on facts in evidence, and should offer opinion about the
914:
conditions. Conversely, the court does allow an expert to testify about issues that may not be personally known by them. This allows the expert to rely upon scientific articles, discussions with colleagues on the subject, testimony read in preparation for testimony in the case and similar pieces of information not personally known to the expert.
1188:
of the major struggles that came out of this precedent was the application to both civil and criminal cases. Many of the courts and judges had trouble interpreting the "general acceptance" notion of a particular field in a concise and non-arbitrary manner. In 2012, courts in nine states still used the
1200:
In 1975, the United States
Congress issued the Federal Rules of Evidence. FRE 702 was issued to provide a standard for expert witness testimony to be upheld by the United States court system. The rule specified that the application of expert witnesses had to be attributed to a person with "scientific
1187:
Through this ruling, the judge's opinion in Frye v. United States set precedent and the standard by which expert witnesses would be utilized in the court system for decades. In the federal courts, between 1948 and 1975, Frye was cited 55 times; however, the use and application was not consistent. One
959:
An expert testifying in a United States federal court must satisfy the requirements of Fed. R. Evid. 702. Generally, under Rule 702, an expert is a person with "scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge" who can "assist the trier of fact," which is typically a jury. A witness who is being
913:
One important rule that applies to the expert witness but not the percipient witness is the exception to the hearsay rule. A percipient witness tells only what he/she actually knows about a case and nothing more. Percipient witnesses cannot give opinions nor conjecture regarding a hypothetical set of
752:
Expert witnesses are called upon in the court system to serve as an objective party to the lawsuit and never function as an advocate for one side or the other. Expert witnesses are present in litigation to explain complicated scientific issues, not to influence the jury or judge with fervor. The main
1173:
Just when a scientific principle or discovery crosses the line between experimental and demonstrable stages is difficult to define. Somewhere in this twilight zone the evidential force of the principle must be recognized, and while courts will go a long way in admitting expert testimony deduced from
1110:
police officer, with the public defenders paying approximately $ 311,000 for seven experts and the prosecutors paying $ 270,000 for three experts. A 2021 survey conducted by SEAK, Inc., a company that helps professionals serve as expert witnesses, revealed a median hourly rate of $ 500, $ 400, and $
832:
An expert witness at the time of trial is qualified by the court and must be re-qualified each time that person comes to trial for the offering of opinions. The qualification is given by each trial judge and takes place regardless of prior appearances by a particular expert witness. Expert witnesses
1062:
The non-testifying expert can be present at the trial or hearing to aid the attorney in asking questions of other expert witnesses. Unlike a testifying expert, a non-testifying expert can be easily withdrawn from a case. It is also possible to change a non-testifying expert to a testifying expert
1028:
The educating witness teaches the fact-finder (jury or, in a bench trial, judge) about the underlying scientific theory and instrument implementing theory. This witness is an expert witness, called to elicit opinions that a theory is valid and the instruments involved are reliable. The witness must
955:
If the witness needs to testify in court, the privilege is no longer protected. The expert witness's identity and nearly all documents used to prepare the testimony will become discoverable. Usually an experienced lawyer will advise the expert not to take notes on documents because all of the notes
932:
such that they are able to authenticate the evidence, prove that it is what they represent it to be, when testifying at trial. Most notably in the context of a criminal prosecution, an expert witness who evaluates or examines an item pertinent to an investigation or case evaluation may add an entry
1302:
Under the CPR, expert witnesses may be instructed to produce a joint statement detailing points of agreement and disagreement to assist the court or tribunal. The meeting is held quite independently of instructing lawyers, and often assists in resolution of a case, especially if the experts review
1179:
In 1923, the case of Frye v. United States instituted significant change to both criminal and civil law by addressing the use of expert witness testimony in conjunction with scientific testimony. In Frye v. United States, the defense team attempted to introduce both the results of a polygraph test
823:
to decide which expert witness to believe. Although experts are legally prohibited from expressing their opinion of submitted evidence until after they are hired, sometimes a party can surmise beforehand, because of reputation or prior cases, that the testimony will be favorable regardless of any
941:
In the case of an expert witness, the weight of his/her evidence depends heavily on the foundation support established prior to an opinion being given. Examples include educational background, review of scholarly works, field studies and trainings which all lead up to developing a foundation of
731:
recognized midwives, handwriting experts and land surveyors as legal experts. The codified use of expert witnesses and the admissibility of their testimony and scientific evidence has developed significantly in the
Western court system over the last 250 years. The concept of allowing an expert
1037:
Called after teaching witness leaves stand. Usually the laboratory technician who personally conducted the test. Witness will describe both the test and the results. When describing test, will venture opinions that proper test procedures were used and that equipment was in good working order.
964:
of the witness in order to challenge that witness' qualifications. If qualified by the court, then the expert may testify "in the form of an opinion or otherwise" so long as: "(1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and
1183:
However, the court rejected the expert's testimony, ruling that: "While courts will go a long way in admitting expert testimony deduced from a well-recognized scientific principle or discovery, the thing from which the deduction is made must be sufficiently established to have gained general
892:
Electronic evidence has also entered the courtroom as critical forensic evidence. Audio and video evidence must be authenticated by both parties in any litigation by a forensic expert who is also an expert witness who assists the court in understanding details about that electronic evidence.
710:
before the court within the expert's area of expertise, to be referred to as an "expert opinion". Expert witnesses may also deliver "expert evidence" within the area of their expertise. Their testimony may be rebutted by testimony from other experts or by other evidence or facts.
1329:(1953) provides authority that where a witness has particular knowledge or skills in an area being examined by the court, and has been called to court in order to elaborate on that area for the benefit of the court, that witness may give evidence of his/her opinion on that area.
841:
In high stakes cases multiple experts, in multiple topics, are often retained by each party. Although it is still relatively rare, the court itself may also retain its own independent expert. In all cases, fees paid to an expert may not be contingent on the outcome of the case.
1201:
or technical knowledge," in conjunction with a list of qualifications that would quality one to be an expert in terms of "knowledge, skill, experience, training or education". This rule thus clarified the acceptable use of expert witnesses in both criminal and civil cases.
899:
recordings and closed-circuit television systems produce electronic evidence often used in litigation, more so today than in the past. Video recordings of bank robberies and audio recordings of life threats are presented in court rooms by electronic expert witnesses.
1095:, where the expert compares signatures to determine the likelihood of a forgery, and medical case reviews by a physician or nurse, in which the expert goes over hospital and medical records to assess the possibility of malpractice, experts often initially charge a
1213:
responded that "the applicable considerations are 'probativeness, materiality, and reliability of the evidence on the one side, and any tendency to mislead, prejudice or confuse the jury on the other.'" The court appeared to reject the previous precedent set by
1114:
The expert's professional fee, plus his or her related expenses, is generally paid by the party retaining the expert. In some circumstance the party who prevails in the litigation may be entitled to recover the amounts paid to its expert from the losing party.
776:
case an expert may be shown two music scores, book texts, or circuit boards and asked to ascertain their degree of similarity. In the majority of cases, the expert's personal relation to the defendant is considered and usually adjudged to be irrelevant.
1204:
However, FRE 702 still left some courts in confusion. The courts who would use this new rule were confused as to whether FRE 702 served to bolster the "general acceptance" ruling in Frye or if FRE 702 was the replacement of this rule. For instance, in
1090:
during pre-trial discovery, or at trial. Hourly fees range from approximately $ 200 to $ 750 or more per hour, varying primarily by the expert's field of expertise, and the individual expert's qualifications and reputation. In several fields, such as
942:
knowledge for credibility of a testimony. Before trial, all experts must prepare a report summarizing their analysis and conclusions and share the report with all other parties. This allows other parties to effectively cross-examine the expert.
744:, to provide scientific rationale behind the proposed legislation. The decision by the English Court to allow for an expert to provide contextual background and detail on a case is often cited as the root of modern rules on expert testimony.
796:, in order to provide the court with a complete knowledge on the fact/action it is judging. The expertise has the legal value of an acquisition of data. The results of these experts are then compared to those by the experts of the parties.
1046:
In the U.S., a party may hire experts to help them evaluate a given case. For example, a car maker may hire an experienced mechanic to decide if its cars were built to specification. This kind of expert opinion will be protected from
1164:(1923), said that admissible scientific evidence must be a result of a theory that had "general acceptance" in the scientific community. This test results in uniform decisions regarding admissibility. In particular, the judges in
1015:
has issued guidelines for experts appearing in
Australian courts. This covers the format of the expert's written testimony as well as their behaviour in court. Similar procedures apply in non-court forums, such as the Australian
1900:
1174:
a well-recognized scientific principle or discovery, the thing from which the deduction is made must be sufficiently established to have gained general acceptance in the particular field in which it belongs.
2365:
933:
to a "chain of custody" document, a form that contains the item's description, the time and date of release for all prior custodians of the item, and the time and date of release to the witness.
1111:
475 for testifying in court, case preparation, and deposition respectively. As for the highest amount ever billed for a single case, the median was $ 24,000 and the mean was just over $ 62,000.
1099:
for their initial report. As with the hourly fees discussed previously, the amount of that flat fee varies considerably based on the reviewing expert's field, experience and reputation.
1051:
by the opposing party. In other words, if the expert finds evidence against their client, the opposite party will not automatically gain access to it. This privilege is similar to the
960:
offered as an expert must first establish his or her competency in the relevant field through an examination of his or her credentials. The opposing attorney is permitted to conduct a
1908:
372:
2385:
2014:
Yell, Mitchell L.; Katsiyannis, Antonis; Ryan, Joseph B.; McDuffie, Kimberly (November 2008). "Recovery of Expert Fees in
Special Education Due Process Hearings".
1436:: Expert witness is qualified to give evidence, where the court itself cannot form an opinion and special study, skill or experience is required for the purpose
1818:
Snow, J.N., & Weed, R. (1997). Mental health forensic issues in
Georgia: The role of the expert witness. Georgia Journal of Professional Counselors, 53-65.
2390:
1303:
and modify their opinions. When this happens, substantial trial costs can be saved when the parties to a dispute agree to a settlement. In most systems, the
1210:
1299:
to the court. A witness may be jointly instructed by both sides if the parties agree to this, especially in cases where the liability is relatively small.
1219:
740:
in 1782. In this particular case, the court was hearing litigation regarding the silting of Wells Harbor in
Norfolk and allowed leading civil engineer,
1423:: Expert evidence is admissible on the basis that the knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue
2361:
1253:
It provides four factors that courts ought to consider when determining whether expert testimony is admissible under the
Federal Rules of Evidence:
1827:
Snow, J.N. & Weed, R. (1996). Forensic issues in mental health: The role of the expert witness. Journal of Legal Nurse
Consulting, 7(4), 2-13.
2183:
1086:
Experts in the U.S. typically are paid on an hourly basis for their services in investigating the facts, preparing a report, and if necessary,
96:
1017:
1560:
1455:: Expert evidence must be provided in as much detail as possible in-order to convince the judge that the expert's opinions are well founded
1231:
1873:
2205:
1853:
Guidelines for Expert
Witnesses in Proceedings in the Federal Court of Australia, Practice Direction, (Federal Court of Australia, 2007)
1479:: Expert's "duties to the Court override any obligation to the person from whom they have received instructions or have been paid by"
2247:
1180:
administered to Frye to determine Frye's innocence as well as the testimony of an expert witness to verify and explain the results.
3568:
769:
1461:: Expert testimony to be based on sufficient facts, data or products of a credible source of test and tried principles and methods
1417:: Expert evidence is to furnish the Judge or jury with necessary scientific criteria for testing the accuracy of their conclusions
732:
witness to testify in a court setting and provide opinionated evidence on the facts of other witnesses was first introduced by
649:
2311:
2159:
1883:
733:
213:
2381:
185:
2285:
1766:
1533:
2395:
192:
2994:
2552:
2451:
1998:
1806:
1390:
968:
Although experts can testify in any case in which their expertise is relevant, criminal cases are more likely to use
250:
232:
130:
72:
1372:
3108:
2977:
1663:
1325:
17:
3563:
2910:
2811:
2050:
1645:
1364:
833:
are those whom the court has deemed qualified to speak on a topic to provide background to anyone on a lay jury.
166:
58:
981:
866:
199:
3070:
2704:
1958:
1368:
170:
2423:
1056:
2355:
3230:
2709:
1639:
858:
557:
522:
425:
181:
3225:
965:
methods, and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case."
3646:
3200:
2699:
1566:
1012:
642:
532:
3283:
1717:
435:
324:
2320:
1311:(issued with a witness summons), although this is normally a formality to avoid court date clashes.
3078:
3060:
1353:
1029:
be qualified as an expert witness, which may require academic qualifications or specific training.
562:
112:
3412:
702:. The judge may consider the witness's specialized (scientific, technical or other) opinion about
3453:
3240:
2729:
2714:
1607:
1357:
1107:
861:
are common kinds of expert evidence heard in serious criminal cases. In civil cases, the work of
159:
31:
3651:
3508:
3493:
1103:
816:
517:
377:
339:
319:
1971:
1218:. The rationale in the Williams case was later adopted by other federal courts, including the
845:
Expert evidence is often the most important component of many civil and criminal cases today.
727:
were used as experts in determining pregnancy, virginity and female fertility. Similarly, the
3641:
3612:
3205:
2883:
2694:
2121:
Giannelli, Paul C.; McMunigal, Kevin C. (2007). "Prosecutors, Ethics, and Expert
Witnesses".
1572:
1292:
1160:
1052:
1001:
989:
882:
773:
635:
498:
488:
392:
362:
357:
1658:
1485:: Expert's duty is not formally defined under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure /Evidence
819:, they are often used by both sides to advocate differing positions, and it is left up to a
206:
3333:
2679:
1901:"What are the differences between an expert witness and a consultant non testifying expert"
1875:
Evidence in the nineties: cases, materials, and problems for an age of science and statutes
1668:
1592:
1092:
985:
793:
473:
458:
401:
314:
309:
294:
8:
3488:
2628:
2545:
1602:
1582:
1222:
which adopted a "reliability" test in 1984. Meanwhile, other federal courts stuck to the
1005:
973:
870:
478:
108:
64:
104:
3303:
2962:
2816:
2801:
2779:
2523:
2503:
2456:
2446:
2177:
2103:
2031:
1587:
886:
854:
614:
463:
420:
382:
3288:
3210:
3048:
2791:
2786:
2739:
2664:
2658:
2498:
2416:
2307:
2165:
2155:
2107:
2098:
2081:
2035:
1994:
1954:
1879:
1802:
1288:
862:
579:
542:
537:
483:
468:
367:
1635:— English caselaw abolishing witness immunity from civil action for negligence
1260:"Whether the theory or technique has an acceptable known or potential rate of error"
3293:
3260:
2759:
2623:
2618:
2583:
2382:
Where the Rubber Meets the Road: Thinking about Expert Evidence as Expert Testimony
2303:
2299:
2291:
2093:
2023:
1837:
1731:
1624:
1597:
1555:
1246:
969:
929:
923:
824:
basis in the submitted data; such experts are commonly disparaged as "hired guns."
574:
552:
527:
453:
430:
410:
304:
1263:"The existence and maintenance of standards controlling the technique's operation"
3542:
3515:
3503:
3483:
3417:
3395:
3375:
3370:
3350:
3215:
3195:
3190:
3093:
3053:
2764:
2689:
2613:
2598:
2518:
1691:
1618:
1577:
1076:
1048:
977:
547:
415:
348:
334:
2283:
2051:"Full Cost in Translation: Awarding Expert Witness Fees in Copyright Litigation"
3619:
3427:
3345:
2934:
2900:
2851:
2836:
2608:
2513:
2493:
2483:
1550:
1230:
which would not be solved until the Supreme Court set a new expert standard in
850:
719:
The forensic expert practice is an ancient profession. For example, in ancient
671:
387:
266:
1841:
1735:
1295:(CPR), an expert witness is required to be independent and address his or her
811:
in most countries. The use of expert witnesses is sometimes criticized in the
3635:
3473:
3432:
3318:
3298:
3270:
3220:
3185:
3159:
3154:
3147:
3098:
3038:
2878:
2868:
2826:
2749:
2744:
2674:
2633:
2557:
2169:
2027:
1799:
Expert Witnessing and Scientific Testimony : A Guidebook, Second Edition
1631:
1612:
1442:: An expert witness is qualified by knowledge, skill, experience or education
1296:
1227:
1140:
1072:
812:
691:
679:
329:
299:
928:
It is important that expert witnesses who handle evidence maintain a proper
3605:
3355:
3323:
3278:
3016:
3011:
2982:
2895:
2873:
2841:
2774:
2754:
2648:
2588:
2578:
2530:
2488:
2466:
2409:
1862:
The accidental expert witness, Tom Worthington, Information Age (IDG, 2005)
741:
728:
623:
609:
2149:
1951:
Effective Expert Witnessing, Fifth Edition: Practices for the 21st Century
1655:— Canadian case law establishing qualifications for expert witnesses
788:, can in some systems call upon experts to technically evaluate a certain
3527:
3468:
3458:
3255:
3250:
3088:
2989:
2905:
2864:
2831:
2796:
2719:
2643:
2593:
2508:
1080:
993:
878:
846:
3591:
3520:
3400:
3338:
3083:
3004:
2999:
2957:
2939:
2927:
2888:
2734:
2724:
2684:
2669:
2653:
2603:
2540:
2535:
1989:
Mangraviti, James J.; Wilbur, Kelly J.; Donovan, Nadine Nasser (2021).
1872:
Carlson, Ronald L.; Imwinkelried, Edward J.; Kionka, Edward J. (1991).
1257:"Whether the expert's theory or technique can be (and has been) tested"
896:
695:
667:
589:
568:
2369:-The Most Influential Supreme Court Ruling You've Never Heard Of (pdf)
2356:
Expert Testimony in Federal Civil Trials: A Preliminary Analysis (pdf)
3498:
3463:
3405:
3380:
3245:
3142:
3130:
3115:
3103:
3031:
2949:
2922:
2806:
1651:
1320:
1136:
1087:
997:
961:
800:
724:
720:
683:
675:
618:
289:
3586:
2374:
1692:"Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 702. Testimony by Expert Witnesses"
1342:
148:
3547:
3532:
3235:
3120:
2917:
2461:
2295:
1308:
1266:"Whether the theory or technique has attained 'general acceptance'"
1096:
781:
703:
687:
599:
3437:
3385:
3365:
3313:
3125:
3043:
2859:
2821:
2769:
2284:
Federal Judicial Center; National Research Council, eds. (2011).
1132:
874:
804:
507:
444:
2377:, 28.4 International Review of Law and Economics, 246-255 (2008)
1536:, a panel of expert witnesses had to decide on the character of
3537:
3390:
3135:
3026:
3021:
2967:
2638:
2252:
1537:
765:
761:
757:
699:
1498:: Expert evidence is examined before the Judge (or Arbitrator)
3478:
3422:
3328:
3169:
2972:
2471:
2248:"Gollum Was a Victim, say Experts in ErdoÄźan Defamation Case"
1304:
1106:
paid nearly $ 600,000 during the trial over the killing of a
1008:– are frequently used in both the civil and criminal courts.
808:
785:
2228:
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993).
1972:"County paid nearly $ 600,000 for expert witnesses at trial"
3360:
3308:
3164:
2562:
2478:
2331:(Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1997).
2329:
Science at the Bar: Law, Science, and Technology in America
2290:(3rd. ed.). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
2013:
820:
789:
707:
604:
903:
27:
Person whose opinion is accepted by the judge as an expert
2432:
2080:
Stern, Hal S.; Cuellar, Maria; Kaye, David (April 2019).
1871:
1748:
The Use of Social Science Data in Supreme Court Decisions
1184:
acceptance in the particular field in which it belongs."
1124:
799:
The expert has a great responsibility, and especially in
274:
2082:"Reliability and validity of forensic science evidence"
1988:
2401:
2206:"A Brief History of Expert Witnesses in U.S. Courts"
2135:
Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923).
1767:"A Brief History of Expert Witnesses in U.S. Courts"
1517:: Expert opinion on ultimate issue is not admissible
1274:
test when analyzing their own expert witness rules.
1192:
standard when analyzing state expert witness rules.
173:. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
2120:
2398:. Volume 52, Issue 4, Article 4. p. 803-840.
2362:Project on Scientific Knowledge and Public Policy
1993:. Falmouth, Massachusetts: Seak, Inc. p. 4.
836:
768:, cause of failure in a machine or other device,
3633:
2079:
1865:
1836:"Forensic Ethics and the Expert Witness". 2007.
1730:"Forensic Ethics and the Expert Witness". 2007.
1523:: Expert opinion on ultimate issue is admissible
1504:: Expert evidence can be compelled to deposition
1332:
2417:
1991:2021 SEAK, Inc. Survey of Expert Witness Fees
1018:Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission
643:
93:The examples and perspective in this article
1561:Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
1446:
1251:Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
1233:Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
2237:Davie v Magistrates of Edinburgh 1953 SC 34
2203:
2048:
1936:"Rule 702. Testimony by Expert Witnesses".
1371:. Unsourced material may be challenged and
873:is usually important, the latter to assess
73:Learn how and when to remove these messages
2424:
2410:
2375:Dueling Experts and Imperfect Verification
2278:The Judicial Assessment of Expert Evidence
2182:: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (
1899:Eri J.D., Christopher (19 November 2013).
1721:, articles "Evidence", "Expert", "Witness"
760:are relied on for opinions on severity of
650:
636:
2204:Ryskamp, Dani Alexis; J.D. (2018-05-10).
2154:(3 ed.). New York. pp. 807–10.
2097:
1391:Learn how and when to remove this message
1249:arose out of the U.S. Supreme Court case
1083:to the evidence in drawing a conclusion.
1041:
682:, is a person whose opinion by virtue of
251:Learn how and when to remove this message
233:Learn how and when to remove this message
131:Learn how and when to remove this message
3569:History of the American legal profession
1898:
1746:Rosemary J. Erickson, Rita James Simon,
1686:
1684:
770:loss of earnings and associated benefits
2287:Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence
1764:
904:Rules of evidence and code of procedure
14:
3634:
2147:
1698:. Cornell Law School. 30 November 2011
1118:
956:will be available to the other party.
936:
2405:
2199:
2197:
2195:
2193:
2143:
2141:
1978:. Associated Press. 28 November 2017.
1932:
1930:
1928:
1926:
1681:
950:
2280:, Cambridge University Press (2008).
1793:
1791:
1789:
1787:
1760:
1758:
1756:
1369:adding citations to reliable sources
1336:
1282:
1270:In 2012, twenty-two states used the
1032:
1023:
807:by an expert is a severely punished
171:adding citations to reliable sources
142:
79:
38:
2336:The Expert Witness and his Evidence
1892:
1240:
1063:before the expert disclosure date.
917:
24:
2396:Villanova University School of Law
2240:
2190:
2138:
1923:
1508:
772:, care costs, and the like. In an
25:
3663:
2553:Restitution and unjust enrichment
2349:
2343:Being an Effective Expert Witness
2016:Intervention in School and Clinic
1784:
1753:
1277:
827:
698:, is accepted by the judge as an
54:This article has multiple issues.
30:For the album-review column, see
3600:
3599:
3585:
2319:
2099:10.1111/j.1740-9713.2019.01250.x
1664:Traffic collision reconstruction
1427:
1341:
1326:Davie v Magistrates of Edinburgh
1066:
1000:– UK, Ireland, and Commonwealth
976:, whereas civil cases, such as
147:
84:
43:
3564:History of the legal profession
2358:(Federal Judicial Center, 2000)
2263:
2231:
2222:
2129:
2114:
2073:
2042:
2007:
1982:
1964:
1943:
1856:
1847:
1646:Questioned document examination
1534:ErdoÄźan-Gollum comparison trial
1403:
1135:knowledge or techniques. Most
908:
158:needs additional citations for
62:or discuss these issues on the
2049:Vennekotter, Nicholas (2019).
1830:
1821:
1812:
1740:
1724:
1710:
1489:
1465:
837:Duties in United States courts
13:
1:
1961:. Retrieved 12 December 2017.
1940:. Retrieved 6 September 2017.
1797:Cohen, Kenneth (2015-08-05).
1765:Ryskamp, Dani (10 May 2018).
1675:
1196:The Federal Rules of Evidence
2334:Reynolds, MP and King, PSD,
1640:Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael
1146:
889:cases are typical examples.
859:forensic firearm examination
558:Declaration against interest
426:Self-authenticating document
7:
2345:, Thames Publishing (1993).
1696:Legal Information Institute
1543:
1333:Comparison of UK and US law
1314:
1158:test, coming from the case
881:in long and complex cases.
107:, discuss the issue on the
10:
3668:
3231:International legal theory
2710:International slavery laws
2705:International human rights
2700:International criminal law
2273:, CRC Press,2nd Ed (1999).
2271:Law for the Expert Witness
1953:. CRC Press. pp. 107–110.
1567:Death of an Expert Witness
1470:
1408:
1143:, is scientific evidence.
1013:Federal Court of Australia
921:
714:
29:
3579:
3556:
3446:
3284:Administration of justice
3269:
3178:
3069:
2948:
2850:
2571:
2439:
1842:10.1007/978-0-387-35383-8
1736:10.1007/978-0-387-35383-8
1527:
1447:Admissibility of Evidence
1131:is evidence derived from
1057:attorney–client privilege
1055:(not to be confused with
436:Hague Evidence Convention
325:Eyewitness identification
3061:Basic structure doctrine
2911:Natural and legal rights
2792:Public international law
2028:10.1177/1053451208321601
1949:Matson, Jack V. (2012).
1801:. Chapman and Hall/CRC.
945:
563:Present sense impression
373:Public policy exclusions
3241:Principle of typicality
2715:International trade law
2431:
2304:2027/hvd.32044032506586
2148:Fisher, George (2013).
1608:Forensic video analysis
747:
32:Expert Witness (column)
1718:Black's Law Dictionary
1104:Kootenai County, Idaho
1042:Non-testifying experts
990:employment consultants
974:forensic psychologists
670:countries such as the
340:Consciousness of guilt
3236:Principle of legality
2995:Delegated legislation
2695:Intellectual property
1573:Employment consultant
1293:Civil Procedure Rules
1226:precedent, causing a
1161:Frye v. United States
1053:work-product doctrine
883:Intellectual property
774:intellectual property
489:Recorded recollection
3454:Barristers' chambers
3396:Legal representation
3334:Justice of the peace
2680:Financial regulation
2256:. 23 September 2016.
1771:The Expert Institute
1593:Forensic engineering
1365:improve this section
1093:handwriting analysis
1006:attending physicians
986:forensic accountants
871:forensic accountants
523:in United States law
167:improve this article
113:create a new article
105:improve this article
95:may not represent a
3489:Election commission
3201:Expressive function
2730:Landlord–tenant law
2629:Consumer protection
2391:Villova Law Journal
2338:, Blackwell (1992).
1976:Coeur d'Alene Press
1603:Forensic psychology
1583:Forensic accountant
1129:scientific evidence
1119:Scientific evidence
970:forensic scientists
937:Weight of testimony
363:Laying a foundation
3447:Legal institutions
3314:Lawsuit/Litigation
3304:Dispute resolution
3109:Catholic canon law
2817:State of emergency
2780:Will and testament
2504:Law of obligations
2457:Constitutional law
2447:Administrative law
2327:Jasanoff, Sheila,
2123:Fordham Law Review
2055:Fordham Law Review
1938:Cornell Law School
1911:on 23 January 2014
1659:Saisie-contrefaçon
1588:Forensic economics
982:forensic engineers
951:Testifying experts
887:medical negligence
867:forensic engineers
855:DNA fingerprinting
666:, particularly in
619:trusts and estates
499:Dead Man's Statute
464:Direct examination
421:Best evidence rule
3647:Forensic evidence
3629:
3628:
3289:Constitutionalism
3211:Law and economics
3049:Act of parliament
2787:Product liability
2740:Legal archaeology
2665:Environmental law
2659:Entertainment law
2499:International law
2313:978-0-309-21421-6
2161:978-1-60930-060-9
1885:978-0-87473-740-0
1401:
1400:
1393:
1289:England and Wales
1283:England and Wales
1137:forensic evidence
1033:Reporting witness
1024:Educating witness
863:accident analysis
660:
659:
580:Implied assertion
543:Dying declaration
538:Excited utterance
484:Proffer agreement
469:Cross-examination
282:Types of evidence
261:
260:
253:
243:
242:
235:
217:
141:
140:
133:
115:, as appropriate.
77:
16:(Redirected from
3659:
3604:
3603:
3602:
3590:
3589:
3413:Question of fact
3294:Criminal justice
2624:Construction law
2619:Conflict of laws
2584:Agricultural law
2426:
2419:
2412:
2403:
2402:
2380:Cole, Simon A. "
2324:
2323:
2317:
2258:
2257:
2244:
2238:
2235:
2229:
2226:
2220:
2219:
2217:
2216:
2210:Expert Institute
2201:
2188:
2187:
2181:
2173:
2145:
2136:
2133:
2127:
2126:
2118:
2112:
2111:
2101:
2077:
2071:
2070:
2068:
2066:
2046:
2040:
2039:
2011:
2005:
2004:
1986:
1980:
1979:
1968:
1962:
1947:
1941:
1934:
1921:
1920:
1918:
1916:
1907:. Archived from
1896:
1890:
1889:
1869:
1863:
1860:
1854:
1851:
1845:
1834:
1828:
1825:
1819:
1816:
1810:
1795:
1782:
1781:
1779:
1777:
1762:
1751:
1744:
1738:
1728:
1722:
1714:
1708:
1707:
1705:
1703:
1688:
1598:Forensic science
1556:Daubert standard
1396:
1389:
1385:
1382:
1376:
1345:
1337:
1247:Daubert standard
1241:Daubert standard
1207:U.S. v. Williams
1141:genetic evidence
996:experts. Senior
930:chain of custody
924:Chain of custody
918:Chain of custody
652:
645:
638:
575:Learned treatise
553:Ancient document
533:Business records
431:Ancient document
411:Chain of custody
263:
262:
256:
249:
238:
231:
227:
224:
218:
216:
182:"Expert witness"
175:
151:
143:
136:
129:
125:
122:
116:
88:
87:
80:
69:
47:
46:
39:
21:
18:Expert witnesses
3667:
3666:
3662:
3661:
3660:
3658:
3657:
3656:
3632:
3631:
3630:
3625:
3598:
3584:
3575:
3552:
3543:Political party
3516:Legal education
3504:Law enforcement
3484:Court of equity
3442:
3418:Question of law
3371:Practice of law
3351:Judicial review
3265:
3216:Legal formalism
3196:Comparative law
3191:Contract theory
3174:
3094:Legal pluralism
3065:
3054:Act of Congress
2978:Executive order
2944:
2846:
2765:Nationality law
2690:Immigration law
2614:Competition law
2567:
2435:
2430:
2373:Kenton K. Yee,
2352:
2318:
2314:
2269:Bronstein, DA,
2266:
2261:
2246:
2245:
2241:
2236:
2232:
2227:
2223:
2214:
2212:
2202:
2191:
2175:
2174:
2162:
2146:
2139:
2134:
2130:
2119:
2115:
2078:
2074:
2064:
2062:
2047:
2043:
2012:
2008:
2001:
1987:
1983:
1970:
1969:
1965:
1948:
1944:
1935:
1924:
1914:
1912:
1897:
1893:
1886:
1870:
1866:
1861:
1857:
1852:
1848:
1835:
1831:
1826:
1822:
1817:
1813:
1796:
1785:
1775:
1773:
1763:
1754:
1745:
1741:
1729:
1725:
1715:
1711:
1701:
1699:
1690:
1689:
1682:
1678:
1673:
1578:Expert shopping
1546:
1530:
1511:
1509:Ultimate Issues
1492:
1473:
1468:
1449:
1430:
1411:
1406:
1397:
1386:
1380:
1377:
1362:
1346:
1335:
1317:
1285:
1280:
1243:
1152:
1121:
1069:
1044:
1035:
1026:
978:personal injury
953:
948:
939:
926:
920:
911:
906:
839:
830:
784:itself, or the
750:
738:Folkes v. Chadd
736:in the case of
717:
656:
548:Party admission
416:Judicial notice
358:Burden of proof
300:Real (physical)
257:
246:
245:
244:
239:
228:
222:
219:
176:
174:
164:
152:
137:
126:
120:
117:
102:
89:
85:
48:
44:
35:
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
3665:
3655:
3654:
3649:
3644:
3627:
3626:
3624:
3623:
3616:
3609:
3595:
3592:Law portal
3580:
3577:
3576:
3574:
3573:
3572:
3571:
3560:
3558:
3554:
3553:
3551:
3550:
3545:
3540:
3535:
3530:
3525:
3524:
3523:
3513:
3512:
3511:
3501:
3496:
3491:
3486:
3481:
3476:
3471:
3466:
3461:
3456:
3450:
3448:
3444:
3443:
3441:
3440:
3435:
3430:
3428:Trial advocacy
3425:
3420:
3415:
3410:
3409:
3408:
3403:
3398:
3393:
3388:
3383:
3378:
3368:
3363:
3358:
3353:
3348:
3343:
3342:
3341:
3336:
3326:
3321:
3316:
3311:
3306:
3301:
3296:
3291:
3286:
3281:
3275:
3273:
3267:
3266:
3264:
3263:
3258:
3253:
3248:
3243:
3238:
3233:
3228:
3223:
3218:
3213:
3208:
3203:
3198:
3193:
3188:
3182:
3180:
3176:
3175:
3173:
3172:
3167:
3162:
3157:
3152:
3151:
3150:
3140:
3139:
3138:
3133:
3128:
3123:
3118:
3113:
3112:
3111:
3096:
3091:
3086:
3081:
3075:
3073:
3067:
3066:
3064:
3063:
3058:
3057:
3056:
3051:
3046:
3036:
3035:
3034:
3024:
3019:
3014:
3009:
3008:
3007:
3002:
2997:
2987:
2986:
2985:
2980:
2975:
2965:
2960:
2958:Ballot measure
2954:
2952:
2946:
2945:
2943:
2942:
2937:
2935:Legal treatise
2932:
2931:
2930:
2925:
2915:
2914:
2913:
2903:
2901:Letters patent
2898:
2893:
2892:
2891:
2881:
2876:
2871:
2862:
2856:
2854:
2852:Sources of law
2848:
2847:
2845:
2844:
2839:
2837:Unenforced law
2834:
2829:
2824:
2819:
2814:
2809:
2804:
2799:
2794:
2789:
2784:
2783:
2782:
2777:
2767:
2762:
2757:
2752:
2747:
2742:
2737:
2732:
2727:
2722:
2717:
2712:
2707:
2702:
2697:
2692:
2687:
2682:
2677:
2672:
2667:
2662:
2656:
2651:
2646:
2641:
2636:
2631:
2626:
2621:
2616:
2611:
2609:Commercial law
2606:
2601:
2596:
2591:
2586:
2581:
2575:
2573:
2569:
2568:
2566:
2565:
2560:
2555:
2550:
2549:
2548:
2538:
2533:
2528:
2527:
2526:
2521:
2511:
2506:
2501:
2496:
2491:
2486:
2481:
2476:
2475:
2474:
2464:
2459:
2454:
2449:
2443:
2441:
2437:
2436:
2429:
2428:
2421:
2414:
2406:
2400:
2399:
2378:
2371:
2359:
2351:
2350:External links
2348:
2347:
2346:
2339:
2332:
2325:
2312:
2296:10.17226/13163
2281:
2274:
2265:
2262:
2260:
2259:
2239:
2230:
2221:
2189:
2160:
2137:
2128:
2113:
2072:
2041:
2022:(2): 112–115.
2006:
1999:
1981:
1963:
1942:
1922:
1905:Forensis Group
1891:
1884:
1864:
1855:
1846:
1829:
1820:
1811:
1783:
1752:
1750:(1998), p. 19/
1739:
1723:
1709:
1679:
1677:
1674:
1672:
1671:
1669:Ultimate issue
1666:
1661:
1656:
1648:
1643:
1636:
1628:
1621:
1616:
1610:
1605:
1600:
1595:
1590:
1585:
1580:
1575:
1570:
1564:
1553:
1551:Ambush defence
1547:
1545:
1542:
1529:
1526:
1525:
1524:
1518:
1515:United Kingdom
1510:
1507:
1506:
1505:
1499:
1496:United Kingdom
1491:
1488:
1487:
1486:
1480:
1477:United Kingdom
1472:
1469:
1467:
1464:
1463:
1462:
1456:
1453:United Kingdom
1448:
1445:
1444:
1443:
1437:
1434:United Kingdom
1429:
1426:
1425:
1424:
1418:
1415:United Kingdom
1410:
1407:
1405:
1402:
1399:
1398:
1349:
1347:
1340:
1334:
1331:
1316:
1313:
1284:
1281:
1279:
1278:United Kingdom
1276:
1268:
1267:
1264:
1261:
1258:
1242:
1239:
1211:Second Circuit
1177:
1176:
1151:
1145:
1120:
1117:
1097:flat fixed fee
1068:
1065:
1043:
1040:
1034:
1031:
1025:
1022:
952:
949:
947:
944:
938:
935:
922:Main article:
919:
916:
910:
907:
905:
902:
851:blood analysis
838:
835:
829:
828:Qualifications
826:
749:
746:
734:Lord Mansfield
716:
713:
672:United Kingdom
664:expert witness
658:
657:
655:
654:
647:
640:
632:
629:
628:
627:
626:
621:
612:
607:
602:
594:
593:
585:
584:
583:
582:
577:
572:
565:
560:
555:
550:
545:
540:
535:
530:
525:
520:
518:in English law
512:
511:
510:and exceptions
504:
503:
502:
501:
496:
494:Expert witness
491:
486:
481:
476:
471:
466:
461:
456:
448:
447:
441:
440:
439:
438:
433:
428:
423:
418:
413:
405:
404:
402:Authentication
398:
397:
396:
395:
390:
385:
380:
375:
370:
365:
360:
352:
351:
345:
344:
343:
342:
337:
332:
327:
322:
317:
312:
307:
302:
297:
292:
284:
283:
279:
278:
270:
269:
259:
258:
241:
240:
223:September 2007
155:
153:
146:
139:
138:
99:of the subject
97:worldwide view
92:
90:
83:
78:
52:
51:
49:
42:
26:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
3664:
3653:
3652:Witness (law)
3650:
3648:
3645:
3643:
3640:
3639:
3637:
3622:
3621:
3617:
3615:
3614:
3610:
3608:
3607:
3596:
3594:
3593:
3588:
3582:
3581:
3578:
3570:
3567:
3566:
3565:
3562:
3561:
3559:
3555:
3549:
3546:
3544:
3541:
3539:
3536:
3534:
3531:
3529:
3526:
3522:
3519:
3518:
3517:
3514:
3510:
3507:
3506:
3505:
3502:
3500:
3497:
3495:
3492:
3490:
3487:
3485:
3482:
3480:
3477:
3475:
3474:Civil society
3472:
3470:
3467:
3465:
3462:
3460:
3457:
3455:
3452:
3451:
3449:
3445:
3439:
3436:
3434:
3433:Trier of fact
3431:
3429:
3426:
3424:
3421:
3419:
3416:
3414:
3411:
3407:
3404:
3402:
3399:
3397:
3394:
3392:
3389:
3387:
3384:
3382:
3379:
3377:
3374:
3373:
3372:
3369:
3367:
3364:
3362:
3359:
3357:
3354:
3352:
3349:
3347:
3344:
3340:
3337:
3335:
3332:
3331:
3330:
3327:
3325:
3322:
3320:
3319:Legal opinion
3317:
3315:
3312:
3310:
3307:
3305:
3302:
3300:
3299:Court-martial
3297:
3295:
3292:
3290:
3287:
3285:
3282:
3280:
3277:
3276:
3274:
3272:
3271:Jurisprudence
3268:
3262:
3259:
3257:
3254:
3252:
3249:
3247:
3244:
3242:
3239:
3237:
3234:
3232:
3229:
3227:
3224:
3222:
3219:
3217:
3214:
3212:
3209:
3207:
3204:
3202:
3199:
3197:
3194:
3192:
3189:
3187:
3184:
3183:
3181:
3177:
3171:
3168:
3166:
3163:
3161:
3160:Statutory law
3158:
3156:
3155:Socialist law
3153:
3149:
3148:Byzantine law
3146:
3145:
3144:
3141:
3137:
3134:
3132:
3129:
3127:
3124:
3122:
3119:
3117:
3114:
3110:
3107:
3106:
3105:
3102:
3101:
3100:
3099:Religious law
3097:
3095:
3092:
3090:
3087:
3085:
3082:
3080:
3077:
3076:
3074:
3072:
3071:Legal systems
3068:
3062:
3059:
3055:
3052:
3050:
3047:
3045:
3042:
3041:
3040:
3039:Statutory law
3037:
3033:
3030:
3029:
3028:
3025:
3023:
3020:
3018:
3015:
3013:
3010:
3006:
3003:
3001:
2998:
2996:
2993:
2992:
2991:
2988:
2984:
2981:
2979:
2976:
2974:
2971:
2970:
2969:
2966:
2964:
2961:
2959:
2956:
2955:
2953:
2951:
2947:
2941:
2938:
2936:
2933:
2929:
2926:
2924:
2921:
2920:
2919:
2916:
2912:
2909:
2908:
2907:
2904:
2902:
2899:
2897:
2894:
2890:
2887:
2886:
2885:
2882:
2880:
2877:
2875:
2872:
2870:
2869:Statutory law
2866:
2863:
2861:
2858:
2857:
2855:
2853:
2849:
2843:
2840:
2838:
2835:
2833:
2830:
2828:
2827:Transport law
2825:
2823:
2820:
2818:
2815:
2813:
2810:
2808:
2805:
2803:
2800:
2798:
2795:
2793:
2790:
2788:
2785:
2781:
2778:
2776:
2773:
2772:
2771:
2768:
2766:
2763:
2761:
2758:
2756:
2753:
2751:
2748:
2746:
2745:Legal fiction
2743:
2741:
2738:
2736:
2733:
2731:
2728:
2726:
2723:
2721:
2718:
2716:
2713:
2711:
2708:
2706:
2703:
2701:
2698:
2696:
2693:
2691:
2688:
2686:
2683:
2681:
2678:
2676:
2675:Financial law
2673:
2671:
2668:
2666:
2663:
2660:
2657:
2655:
2652:
2650:
2647:
2645:
2642:
2640:
2637:
2635:
2634:Corporate law
2632:
2630:
2627:
2625:
2622:
2620:
2617:
2615:
2612:
2610:
2607:
2605:
2602:
2600:
2597:
2595:
2592:
2590:
2587:
2585:
2582:
2580:
2577:
2576:
2574:
2570:
2564:
2561:
2559:
2558:Statutory law
2556:
2554:
2551:
2547:
2544:
2543:
2542:
2539:
2537:
2534:
2532:
2529:
2525:
2522:
2520:
2517:
2516:
2515:
2512:
2510:
2507:
2505:
2502:
2500:
2497:
2495:
2492:
2490:
2487:
2485:
2482:
2480:
2477:
2473:
2470:
2469:
2468:
2465:
2463:
2460:
2458:
2455:
2453:
2450:
2448:
2445:
2444:
2442:
2440:Core subjects
2438:
2434:
2427:
2422:
2420:
2415:
2413:
2408:
2407:
2404:
2397:
2393:
2392:
2387:
2383:
2379:
2376:
2372:
2370:
2368:
2363:
2360:
2357:
2354:
2353:
2344:
2340:
2337:
2333:
2330:
2326:
2322:
2315:
2309:
2305:
2301:
2297:
2293:
2289:
2288:
2282:
2279:
2275:
2272:
2268:
2267:
2255:
2254:
2249:
2243:
2234:
2225:
2211:
2207:
2200:
2198:
2196:
2194:
2185:
2179:
2171:
2167:
2163:
2157:
2153:
2152:
2144:
2142:
2132:
2124:
2117:
2109:
2105:
2100:
2095:
2091:
2087:
2083:
2076:
2060:
2056:
2052:
2045:
2037:
2033:
2029:
2025:
2021:
2017:
2010:
2002:
2000:9781892904584
1996:
1992:
1985:
1977:
1973:
1967:
1960:
1956:
1952:
1946:
1939:
1933:
1931:
1929:
1927:
1910:
1906:
1902:
1895:
1887:
1881:
1878:. Michie Co.
1877:
1876:
1868:
1859:
1850:
1843:
1839:
1833:
1824:
1815:
1808:
1807:9781498721097
1804:
1800:
1794:
1792:
1790:
1788:
1772:
1768:
1761:
1759:
1757:
1749:
1743:
1737:
1733:
1727:
1720:
1719:
1713:
1697:
1693:
1687:
1685:
1680:
1670:
1667:
1665:
1662:
1660:
1657:
1654:
1653:
1649:
1647:
1644:
1642:
1641:
1637:
1634:
1633:
1632:Jones v Kaney
1629:
1627:
1626:
1622:
1620:
1617:
1614:
1613:Frye standard
1611:
1609:
1606:
1604:
1601:
1599:
1596:
1594:
1591:
1589:
1586:
1584:
1581:
1579:
1576:
1574:
1571:
1568:
1565:
1563:
1562:
1557:
1554:
1552:
1549:
1548:
1541:
1539:
1535:
1522:
1521:United States
1519:
1516:
1513:
1512:
1503:
1502:United States
1500:
1497:
1494:
1493:
1484:
1483:United States
1481:
1478:
1475:
1474:
1460:
1459:United States
1457:
1454:
1451:
1450:
1441:
1440:United States
1438:
1435:
1432:
1431:
1428:Qualification
1422:
1421:United States
1419:
1416:
1413:
1412:
1395:
1392:
1384:
1374:
1370:
1366:
1360:
1359:
1355:
1350:This section
1348:
1344:
1339:
1338:
1330:
1328:
1327:
1322:
1312:
1310:
1306:
1300:
1298:
1297:expert report
1294:
1290:
1275:
1273:
1265:
1262:
1259:
1256:
1255:
1254:
1252:
1248:
1238:
1236:
1234:
1229:
1228:circuit split
1225:
1221:
1220:Third Circuit
1217:
1212:
1208:
1202:
1198:
1197:
1193:
1191:
1185:
1181:
1175:
1171:
1170:
1169:
1167:
1163:
1162:
1157:
1149:
1144:
1142:
1138:
1134:
1130:
1126:
1116:
1112:
1109:
1108:Coeur d'Alene
1105:
1100:
1098:
1094:
1089:
1084:
1082:
1078:
1074:
1073:United States
1067:United States
1064:
1060:
1058:
1054:
1050:
1039:
1030:
1021:
1019:
1014:
1009:
1007:
1003:
999:
995:
991:
987:
983:
979:
975:
971:
966:
963:
957:
943:
934:
931:
925:
915:
901:
898:
894:
890:
888:
884:
880:
876:
872:
868:
864:
860:
856:
852:
849:examination,
848:
843:
834:
825:
822:
818:
814:
813:United States
810:
806:
802:
797:
795:
791:
787:
783:
778:
775:
771:
767:
763:
759:
754:
745:
743:
739:
735:
730:
726:
722:
712:
709:
705:
701:
697:
693:
692:certification
689:
685:
681:
680:United States
677:
673:
669:
665:
653:
648:
646:
641:
639:
634:
633:
631:
630:
625:
622:
620:
616:
613:
611:
608:
606:
603:
601:
598:
597:
596:
595:
591:
587:
586:
581:
578:
576:
573:
571:
570:
566:
564:
561:
559:
556:
554:
551:
549:
546:
544:
541:
539:
536:
534:
531:
529:
526:
524:
521:
519:
516:
515:
514:
513:
509:
506:
505:
500:
497:
495:
492:
490:
487:
485:
482:
480:
477:
475:
472:
470:
467:
465:
462:
460:
457:
455:
452:
451:
450:
449:
446:
443:
442:
437:
434:
432:
429:
427:
424:
422:
419:
417:
414:
412:
409:
408:
407:
406:
403:
400:
399:
394:
391:
389:
386:
384:
381:
379:
376:
374:
371:
369:
366:
364:
361:
359:
356:
355:
354:
353:
350:
347:
346:
341:
338:
336:
333:
331:
330:Genetic (DNA)
328:
326:
323:
321:
320:Demonstrative
318:
316:
313:
311:
308:
306:
303:
301:
298:
296:
293:
291:
288:
287:
286:
285:
281:
280:
276:
272:
271:
268:
265:
264:
255:
252:
237:
234:
226:
215:
212:
208:
205:
201:
198:
194:
191:
187:
184: –
183:
179:
178:Find sources:
172:
168:
162:
161:
156:This article
154:
150:
145:
144:
135:
132:
124:
121:December 2010
114:
110:
106:
100:
98:
91:
82:
81:
76:
74:
67:
66:
61:
60:
55:
50:
41:
40:
37:
33:
19:
3642:Evidence law
3618:
3611:
3597:
3583:
3356:Jurisdiction
3324:Legal remedy
3279:Adjudication
3179:Legal theory
3017:Ratification
3012:Promulgation
2983:Proclamation
2963:Codification
2896:Human rights
2884:Divine right
2874:Constitution
2842:Women in law
2760:Military law
2755:Marriage law
2750:Maritime law
2649:Election law
2589:Aviation law
2579:Abortion law
2531:Property law
2467:Criminal law
2389:
2366:
2342:
2335:
2328:
2286:
2277:
2270:
2264:Bibliography
2251:
2242:
2233:
2224:
2213:. Retrieved
2209:
2150:
2131:
2122:
2116:
2092:(2): 21–24.
2089:
2086:Significance
2085:
2075:
2063:. Retrieved
2058:
2054:
2044:
2019:
2015:
2009:
1990:
1984:
1975:
1966:
1950:
1945:
1937:
1913:. Retrieved
1909:the original
1904:
1894:
1874:
1867:
1858:
1849:
1832:
1823:
1814:
1798:
1774:. Retrieved
1770:
1747:
1742:
1726:
1716:
1712:
1700:. Retrieved
1695:
1650:
1638:
1630:
1623:
1619:Gibson's law
1559:
1531:
1520:
1514:
1501:
1495:
1482:
1476:
1458:
1452:
1439:
1433:
1420:
1414:
1404:Similarities
1387:
1378:
1363:Please help
1351:
1324:
1318:
1301:
1291:, under the
1286:
1271:
1269:
1250:
1244:
1232:
1223:
1215:
1209:(1978), the
1206:
1203:
1199:
1195:
1194:
1189:
1186:
1182:
1178:
1172:
1168:ruled that:
1165:
1159:
1155:
1153:
1147:
1139:, including
1128:
1122:
1113:
1101:
1085:
1070:
1061:
1045:
1036:
1027:
1010:
967:
958:
954:
940:
927:
912:
909:Hearsay rule
895:
891:
844:
840:
831:
817:civil trials
801:penal trials
798:
779:
764:, degree of
755:
751:
742:John Smeaton
737:
729:Roman Empire
718:
694:, skills or
663:
661:
624:Criminal law
567:
493:
393:Similar fact
273:Part of the
247:
229:
220:
210:
203:
196:
189:
177:
165:Please help
160:verification
157:
127:
118:
94:
70:
63:
57:
56:Please help
53:
36:
3528:Legislature
3459:Bureaucracy
3256:Rule of man
3251:Rule of law
3226:Libertarian
3089:Chinese law
2990:Legislation
2940:Regulations
2928:Law reports
2906:Natural law
2802:Reparations
2797:Refugee law
2720:Jurimetrics
2661:(Media law)
2599:Banking law
2594:Amnesty law
2572:Disciplines
2509:Private law
1915:19 November
1702:21 November
1615:of evidence
1490:Depositions
1466:Differences
1081:correlation
1002:consultants
847:Fingerprint
815:because in
756:Typically,
528:Confessions
479:Impeachment
368:Materiality
315:Inculpatory
310:Exculpatory
295:Documentary
3636:Categories
3521:Law school
3401:Prosecutor
3339:Magistrate
3126:Jewish law
3084:Common law
3005:Rulemaking
3000:Regulation
2950:Law making
2889:Divine law
2865:Legal code
2812:Sports law
2735:Law of war
2685:Health law
2670:Family law
2654:Energy law
2604:Bankruptcy
2541:Punishment
2536:Public law
2341:Smith, D,
2276:Dwyer, D,
2215:2021-11-01
1959:1466578645
1676:References
1309:subpoenaed
1133:scientific
1088:testifying
998:physicians
980:, may use
897:Voice-mail
696:experience
678:, and the
668:common law
590:common law
569:Res gestae
454:Competence
378:Spoliation
193:newspapers
59:improve it
3499:Judiciary
3494:Executive
3469:The bench
3406:Solicitor
3381:Barrister
3261:Sociology
3246:Pseudolaw
3186:Anarchist
3143:Roman law
3131:Parsi law
3116:Hindu law
3104:Canon law
3079:Civil law
3032:Concordat
2923:Precedent
2832:Trust law
2807:Space law
2644:Drugs law
2514:Procedure
2452:Civil law
2178:cite book
2170:823514237
2108:159219970
2061:(4): 1721
2036:145086428
1652:R v Mohan
1625:In limine
1569:- a novel
1532:During a
1381:July 2019
1352:does not
1321:Scots Law
1077:causation
1049:discovery
962:voir dire
721:Babylonia
706:or about
684:education
676:Australia
459:Privilege
445:Witnesses
383:Character
349:Relevance
290:Testimony
109:talk page
65:talk page
3606:Category
3548:Tribunal
3533:Military
3376:Attorney
3346:Judgment
3206:Feminist
3121:Jain law
2918:Case law
2639:Cyberlaw
2546:Corporal
2524:Criminal
2494:Evidence
2484:Doctrine
2462:Contract
2151:Evidence
1544:See also
1315:Scotland
1102:In 2017
782:tribunal
725:midwives
704:evidence
688:training
610:Property
600:Contract
474:Redirect
267:Evidence
103:You may
3620:Outline
3557:History
3464:The bar
3438:Verdict
3386:Counsel
3366:Justice
3221:History
3044:Statute
2860:Charter
2822:Tax law
2770:Probate
2386:Archive
2367:Daubert
2125:: 1509.
2065:18 June
1471:Conduct
1409:Purpose
1373:removed
1358:sources
1272:Daubert
1071:In the
1004:, U.S.
875:damages
805:perjury
758:experts
715:History
508:Hearsay
305:Digital
207:scholar
3538:Police
3509:Agency
3391:Lawyer
3136:Sharia
3027:Treaty
3022:Repeal
2968:Decree
2879:Custom
2775:Estate
2725:Labour
2489:Equity
2310:
2253:Bianet
2168:
2158:
2106:
2034:
1997:
1957:
1882:
1805:
1776:2 July
1538:Gollum
1528:Turkey
1235:(1993)
869:, and
857:, and
803:, and
794:action
766:sanity
762:injury
700:expert
588:Other
277:series
209:
202:
195:
188:
180:
3613:Index
3479:Court
3423:Trial
3329:Judge
3170:Yassa
2973:Edict
2519:Civil
2472:Crime
2104:S2CID
2032:S2CID
1305:trial
946:Types
879:costs
809:crime
786:judge
708:facts
615:Wills
592:areas
388:Habit
214:JSTOR
200:books
111:, or
3361:Jury
3309:Fiqh
3165:Xeer
2563:Tort
2479:Deed
2308:ISBN
2184:link
2166:OCLC
2156:ISBN
2067:2022
1995:ISBN
1955:ISBN
1917:2013
1880:ISBN
1803:ISBN
1778:2019
1704:2018
1558:and
1356:any
1354:cite
1245:The
1224:Frye
1216:Frye
1190:Frye
1166:Frye
1156:Frye
1154:The
1150:test
1148:Frye
1011:The
994:care
885:and
877:and
821:jury
790:fact
780:The
748:Role
605:Tort
335:Lies
186:news
2433:Law
2388:).
2384:" (
2300:hdl
2292:doi
2094:doi
2024:doi
1838:doi
1732:doi
1367:by
1319:In
1287:In
1125:law
1123:In
1079:or
1059:).
992:or
972:or
792:or
662:An
275:law
169:by
3638::
2867:/
2394:.
2364:.
2306:.
2298:.
2250:.
2208:.
2192:^
2180:}}
2176:{{
2164:.
2140:^
2102:.
2090:16
2088:.
2084:.
2059:87
2057:.
2053:.
2030:.
2020:44
2018:.
1974:.
1925:^
1903:.
1786:^
1769:.
1755:^
1694:.
1683:^
1540:.
1323:,
1237:.
1127:,
1020:.
988:,
984:,
865:,
853:,
723:,
690:,
686:,
674:,
617:,
68:.
2425:e
2418:t
2411:v
2316:.
2302::
2294::
2218:.
2186:)
2172:.
2110:.
2096::
2069:.
2038:.
2026::
2003:.
1919:.
1888:.
1844:.
1840::
1809:.
1780:.
1734::
1706:.
1394:)
1388:(
1383:)
1379:(
1375:.
1361:.
651:e
644:t
637:v
254:)
248:(
236:)
230:(
225:)
221:(
211:·
204:·
197:·
190:·
163:.
134:)
128:(
123:)
119:(
101:.
75:)
71:(
34:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
