This paper analyses a key aspect of the delivery of scientific and clinical expert evidence in the English adversarial system of justice: how it seeks to manage systemic risks in the application of science within criminal proceedings. It argues that the ability to achieve this objective is not determined solely by the law relating to criminal procedure. A range of organisational, funding and normative questions also have to be resolved by the courts, government and legislature. The argument is developed through two short case studies. The first of these focuses on the closure of the publicly owned Forensic Science Service (FSS) and the emergence of an alternative pluralistic forensic science structure based on private companies and police laboratories for providing forensic science evidence. The second case study considers – in more detail - the code of practice and performance standards by which the government and the relevant professional bodies have sought to govern the work of a specific group of expert witnesses, forensic pathologists, and thereby reinforce the legal rules of disclosure that within England and Wales are an essential element for ensuring compliance with the fair trial principles of Article 6 ECHR.
|Title of host publication||Kryminalistyka - Jedność Nauki I Praktyki: przegląd zagadnień z zakresu zwalczania przestępczości (Criminology - the Unity of Science and Practice: a review of the scope of the fight against crime)|
|Editors||Mieczysław Goc, Tadeusz Tomaszewski, Remigiusz Lewandowski|
|Place of Publication||Warsaw|
|Publisher||Polskie Towarzystwo Kryminalistyczne|
|Number of pages||391|
|Publication status||Published - 2015|