In examining the role of expert testimony in criminal law cases, there are several factors to be considered; the most significant is the question of what weight is given to the expert witnesses’ testimony and what affect this has on the outcome. In cases to determine whether an offender ought to be labeled as a dangerous offender, these questions have reaching implications. The medicalization of deviancy, and the role of expert witnesses in presenting their psychological and psychiatric findings to the court, deeply affects the outcomes for the offenders involved. By medicalizing risk and relying on diagnoses such as psychopathy, the medical experts’ testimony contributes to the pathologizing of criminal individuals and leads to higher rates of dangerous offender designations. …show more content…
If the offender is convicted of a designated offence, and has been previously convicted at least twice of designated offences, being sentenced to at least two years of imprisonment for each of those convictions (Criminal Code 1985:s. 752.01), the prosecutor has a duty to advise the court as to whether she/he intends to make a dangerous offender application. If the court finds that there are reasonable grounds to “believe that an offender… might be found to be a dangerous offender under section 753…. the court shall… remand the offender, for… an assessment or have an assessment performed by experts for use as evidence” (Criminal Code 1985:s. 752.1[1]). Expert medical evidence, typically gathered by and testified to by “psychiatrist or psychologist” (Blais 2014:3), is a requirement for a dangerous offender