Admissibility, reliability and common law epistemology

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterpeer-review

Abstract

This chapter argues that in some circumstances expert evidence should be admissible even though the validity of the scientific methods on which it is based has not been established. Such evidence should be admitted where there are good reasons to believe it has some probative value, forms part of a larger matrix of evidence, and the uncertainty resulting from its lack of validation is clearly acknowledged in the expert’s evidence-in-chief. As well as being supported by current legal doctrine this approach accords with the common law’s underlying ‘civic epistemology’ – the practices by which the polity determines what counts as publicly shared knowledge – and in particular with the ‘Davie principle’ by which scientific experts are obliged to make their knowledge claims accessible to, and assessable by, lay factfinders.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationForensic Science Evidence and Expert Witness Testimony
Subtitle of host publicationReliability through Reform?
EditorsPaul Roberts, Michael Stockdale
Place of PublicationCheltenham
PublisherEdward Elgar
Chapter3
Pages106-129
ISBN (Electronic)9781788111034
ISBN (Print)9781788111027
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 30 Nov 2018

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Admissibility, reliability and common law epistemology'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this