Wildy logo
(020) 7242 5778
enquiries@wildy.com

Wildy’s Book News

Book News cover photo

Vol 23 No 8 Aug/Sept 18

Book of the Month

Cover of Housing Allocations and Homelessness: Law and Practice

Housing Allocations and Homelessness: Law and Practice

Price: £99.99 + £10.30 VAT

Offers for Newly Called Barristers & Students

Special Discounts for Newly Called & Students

Read More ...


Secondhand & Out of Print

Browse Secondhand Online

Read More...


Biall2018b
20pcswmx
Pensions divorce
Blackstone 2019
Mental capacity
Arch mags 2019

Expert Evidence Compared

Image not available lge

ISBN13: 9789050950497
ISBN: 9050950493
Published: January 1999
Publisher: Intersentia Publishers
Country of Publication: UK
Format: Paperback
Price: £46.00



Usually despatched in 1 to 3 weeks.

In modern criminal trials, expert evidence often plays an important role. The question as to the guilt of the defendant is often contingent upon the results of DNA analysis, polygraphs, hair comparisons, and other forensic science techniques. At the same time, through a wide variety of problems inherent to the collection and production of such evidence, the use of expert evidence in criminal litigation is often highly problematical.

The vast range of problems that have been identified over the years, and the manifest presence of these problems in some of the more notorious ‘miscarriages of justice’ have made expert evidence one of the most debated topics in legal literature today. Many believe that in this particular field, criminal justice systems are in dire need of legal reform. This study attempts to contribute to this debate through an analysis and comparison of two legal systems that each employ a different method for expert involvement. The study seeks to identify the similarities and differences in how different legal systems deal with expert evidence. Additionally it seeks to establish what the experiences of one country can bring to another for the purpose of enhancing the cornerstone of criminal litigation: the concept of procedural fairness.

Image not available lge
Subjects:
Evidence