This article approaches expert opinion evidence from a scientific, specifically cognitive science, perspective. Decades of scientific research on expertise presents a picture of expertise that bears limited resemblance to the categories and practices used by legal institutions to regulate the admission, presentation and evaluation of expert evidence (ie, opinions based on specialised knowledge). This article seeks to explain why legal institutions should direct more attention to scientifically-based criteria and insights, rather than the somewhat crude set of legal proxies developed by common law judges, if they hope to credibly regulate forensic science and medicine evidence in ways that enhance factual rectitude and fairness.
|Melbourne University Law Review
|Published - 2017