The Federal Rules of Evidence which apply to expert witness testimony are contained in Chapter 7. These have been applied in federal courts and rules arising from these cases are embodied in the Federal Rules of Evidence and, with some variation, to many state legal systems. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. The landmark cases include Frye v.United States. The courts have attempted to provide a methodology to differentiate junk science from valid scientific and technical arguments. In all instances the report should clearly differentiate direct observation from assumption or third party information and fact from professional opinion. Junk Science – Frye, Daubert, Kumho Tire and the Federal Rules of Evidenceīasic issues in acceptance of any report conclusions include provision of adequate documentation of statements, use of accepted references, valid sources of information and acceptable logic. These reflect, rightly or wrongly, on the education and training of the author, and the due diligence of the investigation. Regardless of the choice of style, spelling and grammar matter. This approach also forces a discipline that typically enhances the work presented. Opinions will form naturally in the reader’s mind when facts are presented and explained in a logical flow. Typically, information provided precedes observations, observations precede analyses, and analyses precede conclusions. A report should read logically from beginning to end. While the passive voice has traditionally been used as it appears more dispassionate and therefore less prone to bias, the active voice provides a more direct and personal association between the author and the report contents.Īnother question of style is flow of the report. One obvious choice of style is that between using the active (“I”) or passive (third person) voice. Due cognizance should be given the intended audience of the report to maximize comprehension and credibility. However, the choice of style may affect both the perceived credibility of the author as well as the reader’s ability to comprehend the text. Style is not a technical argument and can therefore vary from author to author without detriment to the technical content. This can have serious financial and legal consequences. Therefore, if details are not included, or the argument presented unintelligible, then, regardless of the soundness of the conclusions, the opinions presented may be rejected or at best misunderstood. It may encompass the whole of any permitted testimony. The report may be the only opportunity to present the findings of the investigation. Regardless of the thoroughness of any investigation or clarity of findings, the results and supporting arguments must be readily understood by the intended audience. These may be attorneys or adjusters, and may ultimately be the trier of fact, such as a judge, jury members, or arbitrator(s). Where a report may be used in litigation, the likely recipients will be non-technical individuals. The audience may therefore be other technical experts but likely include non-technical individuals. These must be presented in a manner which is readily understandable to those who need to make use of these conclusions. The primary objective of a forensic engineering report is typically to present defensible conclusions addressing concerns of a technical nature. While the emphasis is placed upon the written report, the recommendations can equally pertain to verbal reports. This paper briefly describes the essential features of these reports. Such a report is typically written and likely to be distributed to the various interested parties. Such projects will often include the production of reports by the engineering expert witness at the completion of an investigation. Forensic engineering projects are often litigious in which different parties seek to collect or avoid damages based upon technical allegations.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |