4 ms·
It's almost impossible to determine credibility in a field that you know nothing about. Any sufficiently complicated question can be argued using facts on both
by buzzdenver 7y ago
It's almost impossible to determine credibility in a field that you know nothing about. Any sufficiently complicated question can be argued using facts on both sides, and a non-expert will have no idea how much weight each fact should have. For example anyone in software could argue why using the cloud for anything is a horrible idea. And remember that jurors are not allowed to do research at home, and expert witnesses cannot directly debate the topics.
- checkyoursudo 7y ago> a non-expert will have no idea how much weight each fact should have In theory, that is the purpose of the lawyer(s) -- to try to ground the technical expertise in a way that the jury (and often the judge!) can understand and assign value/import/trustworthiness/credibility to the testimony and exhibits they are given. in theory.