In contrast to the United States, the United Kingdom is more limited in opportunities for security experts to testify in civil litigation cases. However, there are areas where security expertise may be relevant and important, such as stolen or damaged property while in the defendant’s custody. In addition, the courts in various parts of the United Kingdom have not developed standards for the admissibility of expert evidence comparable to those in the United States. It is mainly in criminal cases that issues have arisen about the admissibility of methodologically questionable scientific testimony, such as the enhancement and interpretation of images from CCTV cameras. This article discusses some important recent decisions in this area. However, it is shown that clearly-defined standards have not yet emerged. The article also addresses some important cases from Scotland and Northern Ireland where the law is similar in most respects. It discusses expert evidence in civil proceedings, as well as recent developments in criminal case proceedings. In summary, the appointment of single joint experts and the requirements for experts to discuss their reports with one another have significantly modified the adversarial culture of the civil courts. Some recent criminal cases suggest that judges may be moving toward a more rigorous scrutiny of expert evidence. 74 Notes