The issue is broader than forensic evidence. It affects "expert" and especially "government" testimony of all kinds. (See "testilying".) Even if parties seek "outside" experts there will always be a tendency for selection of those "experts" who have developed a bias in favor of the position of each party, either prosecution or defense. The only solution anyone seems to have come up with is to allow comparable "experts" for both sides to examine the same evidence, which means that the government is probably going to have to pay opposing experts because in most criminal and many civil cases the nongovernmental party probably won't be able to afford them.

As an occasional "expert" witness myself (computer expert, paid, and legal historian, unpaid), I have seen the process from the inside, and can paraphrase Bismarck, "Laws (and court decisions) are like sausages, it is better not to see them being made."

There is a reason why so many people cop a plea to crimes they didn't commit.
-- Jon

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Constitution Society 2900 W Anderson Ln C-200-322, Austin, TX 78757
512/299-5001   www.constitution.org  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-------------------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
To post, send message to [email protected]
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can 
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the 
messages to others.

Reply via email to