Also told the judge, the defense 's argument is not newly discovered evidence and the defense knew of this expert during trial. "There 's nothing new for counsel at the time of trial. As far as presentation at trial, the fact that is may have surprised defense counsel, I think they had time prior to trial to get their expert around. I think they were more so upset because we had the better expert," said Rider-Ulacco. Judge Peter Bradstreet denied the defense request for a new trial.
Da-Nisha Mitchell Anthro 3211 Test Your Knowledge Chapter 3 1.Judge or Jury who listens to tell if statements are true. 2.Evidence is anything, objects, witness that are used to make a defendant guilty or Innocent. 3.Circumstantial, conclusive, conflicting and exculpatory 4.Evidence used to make the defendant look Innocent 5.Looking at what is left behind; events, evidence. 6.A direct transfer is when it goes to the source like a drug dealer selling drugs to someone.
The reliability and admissibility of evidence becomes a foundation to this truth as any evidence presented cannot contain elements which can provide doubt towards the validity of the prosecution. This can be shown through guideline 14 of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions agreement to provide advice for the NSW police towards the legal limitations or consequences of evidence obtained during the course of an investigation (Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions n.d). Identification evidence in particular has a lower weight and strength for admission to a court due to the fallibility and circumstantial nature of witnesses. The admissibility of identification evidence was previously determined by judges based on its quality with case law such as R v. Christie providing principles for discretionary powers for admissibility and Alexander v. R providing methods satisfactory to the court for identification such as identification parades under common law. (R v. Christie 1914; Alexander v. R 1981).
Arguments: The State argues that “proffered evidence” of Dr. Kuris’ expert testimony is irrelevant because Cavallo may have committed rape on this specific encounter regardless if he does not possess rapist characteristics. The defendants argue that the reliability of scientific expert testimony should determine the importance, not admissibility. Issue: Whether, (1) Dr. Kuris’ expert testimony is relevant as an expert opinion evidence of Cavallo’s character under the ruling of Rule 47? (2) Did Dr. Kuris’ expert testimony satisfy the special limitations on expert evidence under the ruling of Rule 56 (2) and New Jersey case law? (3) Did Dr. Kuris’ expert testimony achieve general acceptance in the scientific community to convince the court that it is reasonably
Testimony is the elements or opinion of experts in the field that is discussed. Testimony is a recurring element Bogans uses throughout his essay. He makes a bold move of offering testimony against his thesis or claim but also offers testimony supporting his claim. A notable place Bogans
This entails Rule 702 in which a qualified expert can testify in the form of an opinion. What the trial court did was allow an evidentiary hearing to take place over a few days at the request of the CSX Transportation defense. During this hearing they heard the testimony of all the expert witnesses. Their mistake occurred when they ruled the plaintiff’s three scientific experts, Dr. Goldstein, Dr. Infante, and Dr. Durie, as excluded from the trial case on the basis of unreliable testimony. They concluded that the three experts did not use reliable methodologies to prove conclusively that Mr. Harris’s cancer, multiple myeloma, was caused by
I believe keeping orcas in captivities is not humane .To keep orcas in a zoo for display is acceptable, but it is morally unacceptable to use them for entertainment at SeaWorld. I saw the film Blackfish and now, I resent SeaWorld. They care more about profit than animal welfare. Keeping these sentient animals in captivity for an extended period of time causes them severe psychological damage, as evidenced by several killer whale attacks on trainers.
3d at 929. Indeed, “[a]lthough the competence requirement under Rule 702 has always been treated liberally, this does not mean that a witness is an expert simply because he claims to be.” Am. Family Ins.
Under the modified Daubert standard, relevant scientific evidence is only admissible if it is centered upon testable hypotheses, conforms with the standard rate of potential errors, has been peer reviewed, and if the method is generally accepted in the scientific community (Hoog, 2008). However, there are three problems with the application of the Daubert standard. Firstly, David E. Bernstein and Jeffrey D. Jackson (2004) proved that there was no uniformity in the application of the standard in the sense that it’s only abided with in a portion of the states, and not necessarily with full adherence. Secondly, since the judge is not a scientist, it is difficult for him/her to, without doubt, determine the full honesty of the experts’ testimonies. An example from the Willingham case would be the two medical experts asserting that he was a sociopath although one was an irrelevant family counselor and the other, known as “Dr. Death” and later expelled from the American Psychiatric Association for ethical violations, had not even spoken to Todd Willingham.
10.1 Reader response is what it means to that person. This view allows the person to ignore, overlook what the other intent was at the time of writing. Therefore, the ability to twist a text to one’s own bias is all but guaranteed to happen. Authorial intent is a application that views the text, story through the lens of the author. This gets to the point of what the author wants to communicate with the reader and not vis-versa.
What are the factors which would need to be considered? The Judge plays an important role in ruling whether scientific evidence is necessary and appropriate and would decide whether the psychologist can testify about the results from DCAT . The Supreme Court case Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (1993) provides guidance on the admissibility of scientific expert testimony. The Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) require that the Judge ensure that “an expert’s testimony both rests on a reliable foundation and is relevant to the task at hand.” FRE 702 (2012) states: “If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise, if (1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods, and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the
He says “the state has not produced one iota of medical evidence.” This makes the jury think about how valid
With the year-round pressure pertaining to college applications on high school seniors follows the impending decision of choosing an appropriate college major. Generally, the decision-making process involves prioritizing one field of interest over another, however, due to globalization and constant innovation in technology determining a college major has increasingly become the modern day equivalent of the metaphorical line between life and death. Even so, the obvious choice would be the prestigious STEM fields over liberal arts due to the instant job opportunities which are seemingly ludicrous to a recent graduate. Nevertheless, liberal arts education should be encouraged to be pursued at higher education institutions in USA because it helps
When I had first opened Ben Goldacre’s book “Bad Science”, I did not know what was to be expected. Know that I have read and assessed the book I feel as though I have learned something that has given me the confidence to voice my opinion and have evidence to support my arguments on how some products claim to have scientific proof. That being said, fish oils, vitamins, detox, and brain gym are all bullshit creations that should not be sold to the public. Now, I say this only after having read Bad Science, because these techniques are criticized and challenged by Ben Goldacre. I have learned that some detoxification methods are bogus and can be disproven in my very own kitchen, and I don’t have to be an accredited university scientist to be able to prove this.
There are people who believe that those with sales and leadership positions are the only true individuals who possess the power to persuade. No matter who we are and what we do, we have the ability to use persuasion to benefit us as well as others; however, it is an art that is learned in order to become successful at it. Persuasion is the process of changing or reforming attitudes, beliefs, opinions, or behaviors toward a predetermined outcome through voluntary compliance (Mortensen, 2014). Morally, one can see persuasion as a means to keeping peace, or inspiring others to become a better person, and maintaining the safety of others. We desire to see a winning situation for both parties involved.
