skip navigation

CrimeSolutions.gov

Add your conference to our Justice Events calendar

PUBLICATIONS

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Library collection.
To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the NCJRS Abstracts Database.

How to Obtain Documents
 
NCJ Number: NCJ 179630   Add to Shopping cart   Find in a Library
Title: National Conference on Science and the Law: Proceedings
Corporate Author: Federal Judicial Ctr
United States of America

National Acad of Sciences
Publicity Director
United States of America
Editor(s): Carole E. Chaski Ph.D.
Date Published: 07/2000
Page Count: 257
Sponsoring Agency: American Bar Assoc
United States of America

National Ctr for State Courts
Publications Dept
United States of America

Australian Acad of Forensic Sciences
Butterworths Pty Ltd
Australia

National Institute of Justice
US Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
United States of America
Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/NCJRS
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849
United States of America

NCJRS Photocopy Services
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
United States of America
Document: Text PDF 
Type: Conference Material
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This report describes the proceedings of the National Conference on Science and the Law (San Diego, CA, April 15-16, 1999), which provided a forum to examine issues of concern to legal professionals and scientists and to improve communication between these two groups.
Abstract: Conference speakers explored how conceptions of science work in a judicial environment; the role of judges as gatekeepers for scientific evidence; how to distinguish between junk science, prescience, and science that is currently under development; using technology in the courtroom; juries and how they relate to scientific evidence; and how experts are defined and the effect they have as providers of evidence in court. Participants discussed the perceived "disconnect" between science and the law, problems that can arise when the two converge in the courtroom, and ways to promote greater understanding and appreciation of what both disciplines seek to achieve. Participants discussed at length and repeatedly referred to three U.S. Supreme Court cases that cover admissibility of expert witness testimony: Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; General Electric Co. v. Joiner; and Kumho Tire v. Carmichael Co. Regarding using technology in the courtroom, speakers said that during a trial, visuals can enhance the witness and his/her credibility. Diagrams, photographs, and physical evidence can be very powerful and in some ways can overshadow a witness. On juries' comprehension of expert testimony, one speaker said that although some studies have shown that jurors have difficulty responding to "probalistic complex statistical evidence," the literature on the subject "tends to paint the jury as a competent decision maker. If the jury is communicated to properly by the lawyers and experts and instructed properly by the judge, it performs reasonably well most of the time." The tone of the conference was largely hopeful and positive.
Main Term(s): Court procedures
Index Term(s): Judges ; Juries ; Expert witnesses ; Jury decisionmaking ; US Supreme Court decisions ; Scientific testimony
   
  To cite this abstract, use the following link:
https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=179630

* A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's web site is provided.