Chapter 3.4. Expert Evidence: The Rules and the Rationality the Law Applies (or Should Apply) to Psychological Expertise

  1. David Carson Reader in Law and Behavioural Sciences2 and
  2. Ray Bull Professor of Criminological and Legal Psychology3
  1. David L. Faigman Professor of Law

Published Online: 2 MAR 2005

DOI: 10.1002/0470013397.ch16

Handbook of Psychology in Legal Contexts, Second Edition

Handbook of Psychology in Legal Contexts, Second Edition

How to Cite

Faigman, D. L. (2005) Expert Evidence: The Rules and the Rationality the Law Applies (or Should Apply) to Psychological Expertise, in Handbook of Psychology in Legal Contexts, Second Edition (eds D. Carson and R. Bull), John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Chichester, UK. doi: 10.1002/0470013397.ch16

Editor Information

  1. 2

    Faculty of Law, The University, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK

  2. 3

    Department of Psychology, University of Portsmouth, King Henry Building, King Henry 1 Street, Portsmouth PO1 2DY, UK

Author Information

  1. University of California at Hastings, 200 McAllister Street, SanFrancisco, California CA 94102, USA

Publication History

  1. Published Online: 2 MAR 2005
  2. Published Print: 15 MAR 2003

ISBN Information

Print ISBN: 9780471498742

Online ISBN: 9780470013397

SEARCH

Keywords:

  • Daubert trilogy;
  • determining validity;
  • Frye approach and the Frye test

Summary

This chapter contains sections titled:

  • Introduction

  • Rule 702 and the Daubert Trilogy

  • Applying Daubert

  • Daubert's Application to ‘Technical, or Other Specialized Knowledge’: Kumho Tire, Ltd. V. Carmichael

  • When Must a Fact Be a Matter of Scientific Inquiry?

  • Adversarial or Inquisitorial Process?

  • Inquisitorial Expertise: The English Reforms

  • The Move toward the Inquisitorial Process in America: Court–Appointed Experts

  • Conclusion

  • References