Discussion of the Committee on Daubert Standards Summary of Meetings (2006) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
3 The Legal Landscape Post-Daubert
3 The Legal Landscape Post-Daubert
Pages 7-10
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 7... ...
In addition, numerous training programs have been held for judges and lawyers on issues relating to scientific proof. Despite this educational effort, difficult issues remain.
|
From page 8... ...
But others have argued that the application of these standards has been inconsistent with accepted scientific practice in certain cases, and that judges have been too aggressive in excluding evidence. For example, some judges tend to assess scientific testimony by examining each item of supporting evidence in isolation rather than examining the cumulative weight of the evidence in the manner in which the scientific community reaches a consensus of opinion.
|
From page 9... ...
In toxic tort cases, for example, the evidence pertaining to causation could involve laboratory studies from toxicology and molecular biology, clinical studies (including randomized trials) , observation, epidemiological studies of various designs, and case studies.
|
From page 10... ...
· Whether the Supreme Court's comprehension of the concept of validity corresponds with the scientific community's understanding of the term. · Whether forensic evidence in criminal cases is receiving an appropriate level of scrutiny; · Whether judges, by excluding too much evidence, are intruding on the constitutional role of the jury to resolve disputed facts.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.