10 9 Interrogating Witnesses

For example, determine that an eyewitness to a collision with a motor vehicle had the “possibility” to observe the collision. Determine that the witness’s opinion was unhindered and that the witness was in one place while enabling him to see relevant events. Defenders should also take into account that the courts have determined, on the basis of Rule 403, that there are a number of expert testimonials that distort the jury’s role so thoroughly that it is inadmissible. Even if the science behind the opinion is reliable and the expert’s opinion is sensible, as a matter of judicial doctrine, that evidence cannot come in. For example in State v. Southard, the Oregon Supreme Court, decided whether a diagnosis of sexual abuse was admissible. In the decision, the court followed the framework established in Brown / O’Key.

This process generally starts with the recruitment lawyer and ends with an interrogation with questions that the expert seems to be attacking. Sometimes those events are not disputed personal injury expert witness la mesa california and opposition experts simply draw different conclusions from the facts. In other cases, there are facts in dispute and the expert accepts a certain version as true.

Rather, it is helpful for the lawyer to present evidence that forms the basis of the opinion of his own expert, as the lawyer can often provide favorable evidence through the expert that would otherwise be inadmissible. Courts often admit expert testimonials about the lawyer’s objections, giving the jury the weight to be given to the testimony. Therefore, a lawyer should think twice before challenging an expert when there is simply a dispute within the relevant community about the expert’s opinion. If the expert’s testimony is likely to be admitted for his objection, he will likely have expected an opposing lawyer and the expert to have expected the nature of his interrogation, giving them the opportunity to support their arguments. If the scope is considered to be of no merit, a testimony can be excluded.

Environment in which the old maxim is applied more appropriately than the presentation of expert testimonials. The “expert” testimony, by definition, involves an issue that, in the opinion of the court, falls outside the knowledge of a lay person. Therefore, the lawyer should do everything possible to help the jury understand the expert’s testimony.

The Prosecutor’s position is to file an “exposure charge” for the case that convinces the judge or jury of the suspect’s negligence or responsibility. The Prosecutor asks direct interrogation questions from her own witnesses and can question witnesses to the defense. This consists of both a direct examination by the person offering the witness as an expert and an interrogation. A good way to start is to introduce the expert to the judge or jury and revise the expert’s resume to determine that they have extensive experience in teaching and work experience in the field you want to qualify as an expert. Remember that expert witnesses need a variety of experience and cannot be just general experts.