4 ms·
In France it's even worse as the State experts are assumed to be Right and there is no intended procedure for the defense to hire their own experts, at least no
by rossant 2y ago
In France it's even worse as the State experts are assumed to be Right and there is no intended procedure for the defense to hire their own experts, at least not in a way where both sides would discuss on an equal foot.
There's even an obscure article of the law stating that a trial can be adjourned if a witness contradicts a State expert that testified before them.
- frenchman_in_ny 2y agoThough, unlike in the US, the investigators in France are required to seek evidence of both innocence and guilt [0]. So theoretically there's no need for defense experts. [0] https://www.justice.gouv.fr/justice-france/justice-penale/procedure-penale#:~:text=L'enqu%C3%AAte%20permet%20de%20rassembler,la%20personne%20mise%20en%20cause https://www.justice.gouv.fr/justice-france/justice-penale/pr....
- rossant 2y agoThat's the theory. According to my experience in these particular cases, that's rarely how it works in reality.
- unyttigfjelltol 2y agoAnd that's how the justice system breaks down. Prosecutors who pursue a matter with zeal because they can, not because they should. The outward sign of this most often is an emphasis on irrelevant but prejudicial talking points, such as the accused researching lawyers to represent them, or flying a private plane to the Super Bowl to participate in bawdy activities. It starts there and ends with an unjust execution because the police didn't like the way the accused looked at them.