Categories



Navigation



ShowCase

Search

Submit Articles

Your articles will be seen by tens of thousands of visitors and RSS feeds subscribers.

Submitted articles are reviewed by our staffs to ensure quality of content on this site. Please do not submit duplicated content.

What are you waiting for? Write an article and promote your site at no cost now.

Submit now















Understanding the Role of Expert Witnesses In Lawsuits | Legal

By AnthonyArmand
Total views: 5
Word Count: 352














There are many facets to a lawsuit that most people are not familiar with. Expert witnesses are one such facet that simply isn't explained very often in television shows and movies, but they play a critical role.

Nothing is simple these days and the same thing goes for trials. At first glance, a trial is just two parties arguing about different viewpoints of facts as they apply to a law. The problem, of course, is what happens when things get complex.

When things get complex, expert witnesses are introduced to a trial. They have one duty. They must explain complicated things in simple terms you and I can understand if we are on the jury. A few examples will help.

Let's assume we have a case involving a traffic accident. The sides might argue who was at fault. Experts might be called to testify in regard to the speed of the cars at the time of the accident, which had right of way and so on.

While experts testify in civil cases, you probably know them more by their roles in criminal matters. Specifically, they testify as to cause of death and the all important DNA tests and results that often sink or save defendants.

While experts play critical roles in lawsuits of all types, they don't always have the impact you might expect. Why? Well, experts tend to cancel each other out if lawyers aren't careful. One case in particular showed how this can happen.

The battle of experts in the Simpson trial was classic. The prosecution experts testified Simpson's DNA was on various evidence, but the defense testified nobody could say how it got there. The jury ignored the DNA and acquitted him.

In more and more cases, a battle of the expert is what ultimately occurs. The jury ends up either believing one or just ignoring both sides. This somewhat defeats the purpose of having experts if you think about it.

The role played by an expert in a trial is still critical even where the testimony of multiple experts may confuse things a bit. Some issues are simply to complex to address in any other way.

About the Author

Anthony Armand writes about psychiatric expert witness issues for PsychiatricExpertWitness.com.


Rating: Not yet rated

Comments

No comments posted.

Add Your Comment

To leave a comment, please log in first.

You are here Articles > Legal