When Psychologists Act as Expert Witnesses

375 Words2 Pages
When psychologists act as expert witnesses a number of issues are raised surrounding the admissibility of their evidence. Discuss these issues with reference to eyewitness testimony and domestic violence, then make queriess as to how these issues might be resolved. In order to prosecute alleged offences, evidence such as testimony from eyewitness, fingerprint, hair, DNA, etc. which should provided in court accurately. These evidences are only allowed in legal proceedings when they are considered to be relevant (i.e. determined on the basis of the logically which is probative value of the evidence) and admissible which is legally receivable irrespective of whether or not it is logically probative. Therefore, evidence may be highly relevant but be inadmissible for legal reasons. In case where eyewitness testimony is the base or main evidence against an accused, then the reliability of the testimony is very important. In order to prevent a possible miscarriage of justice, the defence may call an expert witness in an attempt to warn jurors of the dangers of relying too heavily on eyewitness testimony. It is because eyewitnesses can only testify about what they have observed or what they know as fact. On the other hand, the expert witnesses may express opinion for what they possess special knowledge about a topic, or knowledge that the juror does not have. In past, the psychiatrists were only acted as an expert witness in courtroom for testing their reliability. However in todays society psychologists are gradually appointing in courtroom. Generally, psychologists have provided expert testimony on a number of different legal issues such as sentencing recommendations; the degree of psychological trauma suffered by a victim of violent crimes and the typical behavioral pattern of abused women and children. In addition, the mental state of a defendant, and whether

More about When Psychologists Act as Expert Witnesses

Open Document