2 ms·
That's the whole point of the adversarial system. The prosecution finds experts that state one opinion, the defense finds experts that say a contrary opinion, t
by vkou 4y ago
That's the whole point of the adversarial system. The prosecution finds experts that state one opinion, the defense finds experts that say a contrary opinion, the juries pick out whose opinions they want to believe. That's the whole point of expert witnesses - they are the only witnesses in the courtroom who are there for their opinions.
The problem is that one side of this equation has a cottage industry of well-funded experts to pick from, but there isn't a cottage industry of well-funded 'bullshit debunkers' to work for the defense.
- eesmith 4y agoThat's incomplete, to some extent. The Daubert standard says the judge is a gatekeeper who can rule that a given expert's opinion will not be presented to the jury unless the expert's opinions are relevant, reliable, and based in scientific knowledge. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daubert_standard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daubert_standard
- tinalumfoil 4y agoIt's more than that. The judge usually has a good relationship with the prosecution, and the judge is deciding on what the jury is allowed to see and what expert witnesses are allowed to testify as expert witnesses.
- sobkas 4y ago>the defense finds experts defense finds nothing because it's a public lawyer and he barely can afford paper for photocopier, so no highly paid experts for you if you are poor