...1. Please explain the Frye Standard. The Frye Standard is a standard used to determine the admissibility of an expert’s scientific testimony. A court in which applies the Frye Standard must determine whether or not the method which the evidence was obtained was generally accepted by experts in the field in which it belongs. 2. When did this standard come into effect and why? He Frye Standard came out of a 1923 legal decision (Frye V United States). It was a case discussing the admissibility of a polygraph test. James Frye was convicted of murder and first admitted his guilt then recanted his confession. The Frye Standard came when they tried to convict on a polygraph test which is not admissible as guilt in the court of law. The Frye Standard is now that all evidence must determine admissibility of an expert in his or her field. 3. Please explain when a forensic expert witness would have to attend a Daubert hearing. 4. What is a Daubert hearing? A Daubert hearing is when a counsel objects to a testimony or an expert in general. This hearing usually takes place before a trial and out of a jury’s presence. It is a hearing for a judge to determine if the testimony is an expert in his or her field. 5. What does it mean that the judge is the “keeper”? The judge has the final motion to determine if the testimony truly proceeds from scientific knowledge. 6. What would some tests for establishing "validity" be? The judge will determine if the expert has testified...
Words: 386 - Pages: 2
...Requirement’s- The Frye and Daubert Test’s CJ305-01: Legal Foundations of Criminal Evidence Sigrid Hess June 3, 2013 Expert Witness Requirements This article will briefly review the applicable standards of the admission and exclusion of expert testimony in the Federal Court. The guidelines discussed in this article, principally pertain to the subject of the reliability of the methodology supporting the submitting of evidence. In addition, the qualifications of the proposed experts in the pertinent field of expertise, and the relevancy of evidence from expert’s .These areas also offer opportunities for confronting the opponent’s case by excluding the evidence on the grounds of; lack of expert qualification of the witness or the lack of relevance of the testimony to the facts of Court Cases. I. Discuss the Frye and Daubert tests Frye Test: Frye v. United States was a case in 1923 U.S. v. Frye, 54 App.D.C. 46, 293 F. 1013 C.A.D.C 1923. Retrieved from: Westlaw.com. , in which James Frye was tried for murder and in his defense he produced the testimony of an expert with the result of a blood pressure test, in the expectation to prove that he was speaking the truth when he did not accept his guilt. This deception test was intended to tell if a person is being dishonest or not. This case became a standard for judges while allowing admissibility of testimony of experts based upon scientific methods. Frye test is also referred to as Frye standard or general acceptance. This...
Words: 1817 - Pages: 8
...Daubert Paper Lisa Boetta Acct343-F1WW Tricia Bell October 27, 2013 The Dauber standard is the standard used by trial judges to determine if an expert witness’ testimony is based on scientifically backed up reasoning and if it can be applied to the facts of the case at hand. There are multiple factors to determine if the criterion has been met. They are: “(1) whether the theory or technique in question can be and has been tested; (2) whether it has been subjected to peer review and publication; (3) its known or potential error rate; (4) the existence and maintenance of standards controlling its operation; and (5) whether it has attracted widespread acceptance within a relevant scientific community”. (Daubert Standard) In Daubert vs. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, suit was brought against the makers of Bendectin. It was alleged that the drug caused serious birth defects in children whose mothers had taken it while pregnant. Copious amounts of published scientific literature stated that there was not a link between the consumption of Bendectin and birth defects in humans. Eight well credentialed experts testified that Bendectin can cause side effects in animals as well as in humans, however, their testimony was deemed by the court to not meet general acceptance standards for the admission of expert testimony. Since their findings have not been published by the scientific community, they were not considered to be generally accepted (Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals...
Words: 1482 - Pages: 6
...belongs. REASONING: The deception test had not gained such standing and scientific recognition, and its exclusion from trial was justifiable. DAUBERT v. MERRELL DOW PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., 509 U.S. 579 (1993) ISSUE(S): What is the standard for the determination of whether expert testimony is admissible? FACTS: • The Dauberts brought a suit against Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals for birth defects. • The Plaintiffs case states their mothers suffered injury after ingesting the product Bendectin that is manufactured by the defendant. • The Dauberts provided several expert witnesses to attest to the claim. • Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals brought in their own expert witnesses who had opposite opinions than the Plaintiff’s expert witnesses. • The defendants’ expert witnesses claim that the Plaintiffs expert witnesses had a lack of research. HOLDING(S): The Plaintiffs’ expert testimony was determined to be inadmissible. The Federal Rules of Evidence surpasses the “general acceptance” standard previously used. REASONING: The adoption of the Federals Rules of Evidence overtakes any of the past common law standards. It essentially replaces the “general acceptance” standard that was previously used for a guideline of expert witness admissibility. GENERAL ELECTRIC CO. V. JOINER, 522 U.S. 135 (1997) ISSUE(S): Should the abuse of discretion standard apply in reviewing the admission or exclusion of expert testimony in a trial court? FACTS: • The Plaintiff, Joiner, was diagnosed with small-cell...
Words: 1070 - Pages: 5
...March 23, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, No. 97-1709, that all types of expert evidence are subject to the relevance and reliability ‘gatekeeping’ function that the Supreme Court had articulated with respect to scientific evidence in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993). The Court further held that trial judges have substantial discretion or ‘considerable leeway’ to determine how to evaluate relevance and reliability and to make a determination on whether to admit the expert evidence. While this decision will make it more difficult when judges are hostile to the type of expert testimony being offered by plaintiffs, there were some helpful aspects to the Court’s opinion that lawyers for plaintiffs should know and emphasize: • The Court rejected arguments that all, or even one, of the four Daubert factors (testing, peer review, error rates, and scientific acceptability) must be satisfied for the testimony to be admissible, noting that even in scientific evidence cases the Daubert factors ‘do not all necessarily apply’; • The Court endorsed the idea that expert testimony from reliable fields of study that conforms with the standards used in that discipline should be admissible (In doing so, the Court was allowing trial judges to exclude testimony that uses techniques or methods not commonly practiced within that field of expertise or testimony based on such claims of expertise as astrology);...
Words: 395 - Pages: 2
...The best set of standards in reference to expert witness admissibility for the state of Florida is to follow an amended version of the Daubert standard, which is considered to be a mixture of Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 702 with The Daubert Standard. This standard renders a better working solution to the original ‘general acceptance’ method of the Frye standard in the 1920’s. It allows the judge to be more of a referee in regards to information, it allows only trustworthy, qualified experts to take the stand, it requires a witness to be proficient in knowledge, training, skill, experience or education before they can give their expert opinion, and it does not allow misleading testimony on the facts of a case. In Frye v. United States,...
Words: 276 - Pages: 2
...THE DAUBERT STANDARD 2. The Daubert Standard was resulted from the case Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals (1993). The plaintiffs argued medicine that had been given to pregnant women to eliminate morning sickness caused birth defects. The medicine was promoted by Dow Pharmaceuticals. The Daubert standard was preceded by the Frye standard stated that knowledgeable testimony must be based on factual information that was collected by a scientific method, accepted within the scientific community. This information belonged in, and was germane to the case (Bartol & Bartol, 2012). These rules were found to be more constricting than needed, and the ruling on admissible evidence changed after the Daubert case (Bartol & Bartol, 2012; Heilbrun, Grisso, & Goldstein, 2009). Another problem with the Frye standard was that most judges and jurors lacked the scientific knowledge needed to measure whether or not the methods used were in fact scientific, or if the evidence was basically trustworthy (Bartol & Bartol, 2012)....
Words: 457 - Pages: 2
...spring, plaintiff calls a dowser to testify that he dowsed plaintiff's land and estimates a spring flowing approximately 500 feet beneath the surface. 1. Does this testimony constitute scientific knowledge? No, dowsing is not recognizes to be effective in the scientific community. 2. Should it be admitted under the Frye test? No, this would not be admitted under the Frye test because it has not gained general acceptance in the particular field in which it belongs. 3. Should it be admitted under the Daubert test? No, the judge to allow admittance the court requires the expert to tie there assessment to known scientific conclusions. Explain your reasoning. Dowsing is not recognized in the scientific community, it was the ancient art of finding things, there is no scientific evidence to prove that dowsing is effective. For it to be admitted under Frye it must be sufficiently established and have gained general acceptance under the scientific community. Under the Daubert Standard even though the dowser might have specialized knowledge in dowsing it can not be admitted because it does not contain facts or data that have been proven and accepted in the scientific field. The testimony must be based on reliable principle and methods. It is the role of the trial judge to ensure relevance and reliable scientific evidence to allow the testimony to be admissible. The testimony of the Dowser is not based on sufficient facts or data it could not be admissible as evidence. The case is over...
Words: 296 - Pages: 2
...Unreasonably Dangerous Underwear Dangerous product? A large guy (280-90 pounds) ironically won a one-week trip to Hawaii as a reward for selling more than $20,000 in diet products. But in a lawsuit against Hanes, the underwear maker, he alleged his “dream trip” went awry due to allegedly defective briefs which “gaped open and acted like a sand belt on my privates,” causing injury. We’ll let the court elaborate on this interesting products liability case: Plaintiff testified that by the second day in Hawaii he was in debilitating pain. However, … he ignored the pain until he returned to Pensacola two weeks later. He explained he was able to ignore the pain because he was enjoying himself so much on this long anticipated vacation that he did not dwell on or focus on the pain to any degree. Plaintiff testified he believed sand that he picked up in his swim trunks while enjoying the Hawaiian surf had irritated his penis. Over the next few days he and his wife “walked all over the place” until his condition worsened to the point that he “could hardly walk.” Plaintiff testified his inability to walk was caused by defendant’s defective manufacturing of his underwear which caused his “fly” to gap open. The gap resulted in his penis protruding from his underwear, whereupon the edges of the opening abraded his penis like “sandpaper belts.” … Under cross examination plaintiff admitted he never examined his penis to assess the problem and/or treat the problem. He testified he is a...
Words: 587 - Pages: 3
...investigators perform their job? Technology improved the way criminal investigators perform their jobs by making it easier to track things, there is different types of software out there today to help them with these issues, and make the jobs easier, when you have different technology to help. 3. Why would a company report or not report a compromise case? The reason a company may or may not report a compromise because if it’s not in their favor and they may report it if it’s in their favor and vice versa. They wouldn’t want to look incompetent. 4. Who is in charge of labeling and securing sensitive information? The one in charge of labeling and securing sensitive information is the forensic specialist. 5. What is the Daubert standard? The Daubert Standard provides a rule of evidence regarding the admissibility of expert witnesses' testimony during United States federal legal proceedings. 6. Why would someone use a hex editor in a forensic investigation? The reason someone would use a hex editor in a forensic investigation is if the suspect has deleted files and has overwritten them on his or her hard disk, you can always use a hex editor to view any data stored in (or deleted from) both files and disk sectors. A hex editor allows you to peek at the physical contents stored on a disk, regardless of the boundaries of files, directories, or partitions. 7. What is the largest known data loss incident to date?...
Words: 898 - Pages: 4
...important challenge that must be addressed. Forensic evidence is collected at the crime scene. If the evidence is not properly documented and collected it can be found to be unreliable in the court process. In order for forensic evidence to be accepted in a court of law it must be documented through sketches, photographs, and video tapings and it must be collected using accepted standard forensic collection methods. If evidence is not properly documented or collected the chain of evidence is broken and the court will exclude the evidence from the court case. The chain of evidence refers to an important aspect of forensic involving the movement of evidence. In order to show the court the evidence was located and collected at the scene and then taken directly to the lab for analysis as well as being stored properly at the lab there needs to be clear documentation. This starts with photographing the evidence located at the scene and clearly documenting each step of the collection and analysis process. When forensic evidence is presented in court it must be able to meet a specific legal standard before it can be accepted...
Words: 1538 - Pages: 7
...The case Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals is about two children that were born with birth defects. They and their parents sued Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals because they are the manufacturer of the drug Bendectin which they believed is the cause of their defects. When the courts asked for evidence that the drug could indeed cause such birth defects all they could come up with was that in some animal testing there were defects. The courts did not consider this as admissible. For an expert testimony to be admissible, the theory would have to be accepted in the scientific field, the theory would had to been tested and the results would have to be documented. The only thing that they had going for them was that the relationship between the drug and the birth defect. They could not prove that the drug cause the defect cause there was no other known cases and that there were no circumstantial evidence provided by their experts. The Daubert Standard imposed new obligations on the federal judge with regard to expert testimony. It said that the judge is the one who must screen all expert testimony for relevancy and reliability on the...
Words: 661 - Pages: 3
...admissibility of DNA evidence was not a topic that was widely discussed at the time. When more and more people began to use DNA evidence in the courtroom, the rules for admissibility had to be set (Shaer, Matthew) Typically, there are two standards used to determine the admissibility of DNA evidence, the “Frye standard” and the “Daubert standard.” The Frye standard constitutes that evidence based on a scientific technique is admissible only when the technique is generally accepted as reliable in the scientific community (Sundquist, Terri). The Daubert ruling states that the evidence should be subject to peer review and the trial judges ultimately decide if the evidence will be admissible in the courtroom. The Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals ruling allows little room for error and is widely accepted throughout the United States (Drury University). Although the courts faced numerous difficulties in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s when it came to the admissibility of DNA evidence, most of the bigger cases allowed DNA evidence into the trial so long as it was properly collected and analyzed. If they chose to consider the evidence inadmissible, it was usually due to questions of the chain of custody or if the DNA was properly tested (Frye, Daubert and Where Do We Go From Here) Of course, determining the admissibility of DNA evidence was already stressful enough when the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) introduced a new system known as the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS)...
Words: 1055 - Pages: 5
...Forensic Facial Reconstructions Samantha McAnally CRMJ430 April 20, 2013 Abstract This paper will focus mainly on the history and the various techniques that forensic facial reconstruction has to offer. It will also go over some problems or an issue that is process has faced over the years. The Daubert Standard will discuss and how facial reconstruction was allowed as evidence thru this standard. I will go over all the periods of time that facial reconstruction was used. Computerized and Clay reconstruction will be discussed and how they have help investigators solved current and cold case crimes. Forensic Facial Reconstruction Forensic facial reconstruction is the method of restoring the appearance of a person (whose identity is frequently not recognized) from their skeletal remnants through a combination of creativity, forensic science, anthropology, osteology, and anatomy. The situation can also display what an individual would look like as an adult if they were abducted or gone missing as adolescents. In this paper, we will discuss the different approaches that can be used in facial reconstruction from computerized techniques to sketch artist techniques. The fortitude of forensic facial reconstruction is to yield an image from a skull that suggests an adequate resemblance of the thriving individual that the situation will assist in the proof of identity of the skeletal remnants while there are not any additional resources accessible. Finding skeletons used...
Words: 2024 - Pages: 9
...99 Chapter 8 Litigation Services Provided by Accountants CHAPTER SUMMARY Overview This chapter explains what standards apply to accountants when they perform litigation services, discusses how to qualify as an expert witness, gives tips for testifying at a deposition or trial, and points out the potential liability that accountants risk when they testify at trial. Litigation in the United States ¶8001 U.S. Tort Costs Climbing The U.S. tort system cost $248.1 billion in 2009, which was about $808 per U.S. citizen ($12 in 1950). U.S. tort costs accounted for 1.74 percent of GDP (2.09 in 2002). Increasingly inefficient, the U.S. tort system returns less than 50 cents on the dollar to people it is designed to help; only about 22 cents to compensate for actual loss. ¶8006 A Dispute Begins There are two different courtroom environments: civil and criminal. Some experts believe it is more difficult to convict in a criminal trial (e.g., Casey Anthony). Types of Litigation Services Provided by Accountants ¶8011 Consultant An accountant may be hired by an attorney to gather and interpret facts, prepare analyses, help the attorney interpret evidence, advise about issues and strategies involved in a legal matter, locate other accountants to act as consultants or expert witnesses, and help expert witnesses form their opinions. Accountants acting as consultants will not be asked to testify in a judicial or regulatory proceeding, and their work usually will be protected from disclosure...
Words: 6617 - Pages: 27
