Admissibility of Expert Opinion Evidence - Case Study Example

Fire investigations Name Date Course Introduction In common law, the concepts of laissez-faire allows for the use of expert opinion evidence when dealing with a case. In the fire investigations the experts ate usually allowed to provide their expert opinion with regards to the scientific criteria that provides a clear understand of the evidence. This is aimed at enabling the jury to make appropriate decisions. The use of expert opinion in the fire investigations is common since some fires are caused by arson which is a criminal offence. The opinion provided by the experts may lead to the prosecutions incase the fire investigations indicates that the cause of fire is arson. The reliability of the expert opinion is a question that has emerged as the evidence may not be reliable1. The failure of a jury to use reliable information may lead to wrongful convictions. The paper thus discusses the admissibility of expert opinion evidence and its reliability. Discussion In the criminal trials, the witnesses are usually prohibited from expressing opinions on the matters that are to be determined by the jury. However, the prohibition is subject to exceptions when it comes to the opinion of someone who posses specialized knowledge. However, the knowledge should be wholly or substantially based on the knowledge. The witnesses with specialized knowledge are usually allowed to express their opinions since the jury may lack knowledge in that area. The jury is supposed to draw reliable inferences from the opinions of the experts. This has led to questions on whether the opinions provide by the experts should be used as the jury does not have information regarding the issues. In the case of Massey v. Tameside and Glossop Acute Services NHS Trust, it was established that the expert opinion did not include reasoning and hence affecting its reliability2. The fires experts usually present their expert opinions when dealing with the arson or fire incidences. The reliability of the expert opinion evidence is also questionable as the jury uses the evidence without determining whether it is reliable or not. In the English Common Laws, cross examination of the experts is usually required for the purposes of determining the reliability of the expert opinions. However, it is difficult for the cross examinations to determine the reliability of expert opinion as the person conducting the cross examination may not have adequate knowledge on the issue3. The lack of adequate knowledge makes it difficult for the experts to be challenged. The expert witnesses have the duty to be truthful and independent in relation to the court and the client. However, at time there could be a conflict of interest which may hinder the experts from being truthful and independent. The conflict of interest affects the reliability of the expert opinions in the case and hence impacting negatively on the outcomes of the case. This is considering that the jury may not challenge the expert opinions as they may not have adequate knowledge on the issue. It is also important to note that the most of the experts may end up being biased when providing their expert opinions. This is because the parties usually select the experts that are likely to provide opinions that may favour their case. As a result of this, it is difficult for the expert opinion to be reliable which impact negatively on the case. Some experts are usually included in the case for the purposes of identifying weaknesses that may be on the opinion of other experts. This is usually common when the experts are to be part of a team for a party to the case4. This makes it difficult for the experts to provide accurate information and hence the bias. The bias in the expert opinions may not be deliberate in some instances but it may be unconscious. In the case of Petursson and Another v. Hutchison 3G U.K. Ltd, the court established that the expert opinion was wrong as it was not based on generally acceptable scientific rules5. However despite this, it still has the potential of affecting the outcome of the case when it is relied upon by the jury. The retired experts with good credentials are usually at times relied upon for their expert opinions. However, it is also important to note that they make lack current research regarding the issues and hence affecting the quality of expert opinions that they provide to the court. This may also result to bias although it is mot deliberate. The scientific techniques and concepts are also undergoing changes on a continuous basis due to the technological changes. The presence of such changes may affect the quality of evidence being provided. This makes the expert opinion unreliable as it can be proved otherwise with an emergence of new technology. In the case of R v. Holdsworth the court of appeal noted that a lot of action is needed when dealing with scientific evidence as changes may occur with the increase in knowledge6. On the other hand, it is also important to note that some of the expert evidence is subject to discussion and different experts may come up with different conclusions. Relying on the evidence provided by one expert may therefore affect the process. The economic tie between the expert and the engaging party is also an issue that affects the reliability of the expert opinion7. In most cases, the people providing the expert opinion are usually hired as they are professionals. As a result of this, they have a duty to the party that hired them and may provide their opinions based on the needs of the party that hired them. It is for this reason that the opinions of some experts seems to be more of an argument to the case as compared to being an expert opinion. Some of the scientific opinions that are provided by the experts are not conclusive. However, the jury may not be in a position to determine whether it is conclusive or not. In most cases the expert opinions are embraced by the jury and hence bring into play the question of reliability of the evidence provide by the experts. The expert opinions may also be based on unfounded reasoning and in some instances the experts have had to change their opinions on further cross examination. This indicates that some of the evidence provide by the experts is not reliable and hence its ability to cause unfair judgment. However, the jury in most cases does not consider such facts as they lack expert knowledge regarding different issues. Sometimes the experts may not be confident of their own opinions and hence leading to the changes. In the case of Generics (U.K.) Ltd. and others v. H Lundbeck A/S, it was established that the statements were prepared with lack of care and hence impacting negatively on the reliability8. Such factors indicate that the expert opinion evidence should not be fully relied upon as it also has weaknesses. At times, the experts may also stray from their field of expertise. This may be done deliberately in some cases while in some cases it is not. However, straying outside the field of expertise may impact negatively on the outcome of the case. This is an indication that the expert opinions may at times be unreliable and the jury is supposed to take into account such factors before considering the use of the evidence. The expert opinion is supposed to furnish the court with information that is useful in determining where the truth lies regarding a case. However, the admissibility of the expert opinion has its hazards that impact negatively on its reliability. Some experts are usually associated with certain opinions and involving them in the case may have negative impacts as they end up providing their expert opinions in favour of certain positions. In the case of Bhamra V. Dubb, it was noted that there were differences in the expert opinions and hence affecting the outcome9. A lot of disparities in the expert opinions are also common due to the positions that are usually taken by the experts with regards to the cases including fire incidences. The jury is supposed to approach such issues with healthy skepticism. However, it is not the case in most of the incidences. This has impacted negatively on the reliability of the expert evidence in the fire investigations. Conclusion In conclusion, it is evident that the expert opinion evidence is admissible by the jury despite the lack of reliability of the evidence in most instances. The level use of the expert opinion evidence may also lead to bias which affects the outcome of the case. Some of the scientific evidence from the experts may not be conclusive and this leads to the lack reliability. It is also evident that the reliability of the expert opinion may lead to the wrong decisions being made as the experts provide evidence depending on the parties that have hired them. It is evident that the expert opinion is influential in the overall decision making process by the jury. List of References Petursson and Another v. Hutchison 3G U.K. Ltd. [2005] E.W.H.C. 920 (TCC). R v. Holdsworth [2008] E.W.H.C. 971 Generics (U.K.) Ltd. and others v. H Lundbeck A/S [2007] E.W.H.C. 1040. Bhamra V. Dubb [2010] E.W.H.C. 13 Massey V. Tameside and Glossop Acute Services NHS Trust [2007] E.W.H.C. 317 Law Commission, 2011, Expert evidence in criminal proceedings in England and Wales (Vol. 829), The Stationery Office. Edmond, G, 2011, The admissibility of incriminating expert opinion evidence in the US, England and Canada, Judicial Officers Bulletin, 23(8), 67. Stevens, A, 2011, Reliability and cogency of expert witness evidence in modern civil litigation, Anaesthesia, 66(9), 764-768. Shaw, K, 2011, Expert Evidence Reliability; Time to Grasp the Nettle, Journal of Criminal Law, 75(5), 368-379. Read More