Articles Tagged with expert assistance

SBS has been subject to significant criticism, so the “experts” have changed it’s name to Abusive Head Trauma.  But does a name change mean that the “syndrome” or “diagnosis” is any more real?

Shaken Baby Syndrome, Abusive Head Trauma, and Actual Innocence: Getting It Right

Keith A. Findley University of Wisconsin Law School

Now that the current slew of confrontation cases are decided it’s time to regroup.

Let’s start with my former evidence professor, Paul Gianelli (a former Army JA).

Confrontation, Experts, and Rule 703

This report from questions why expert payments within the 3ID claimancy take so long.

The military judge also questioned why experts for the defense continue to have difficulties obtaining payments for work done on Bozicevich’s behalf as attorneys prepare for a February 2011 capital court-martial trial.

The humor is that this is neither a new problem nor a problem limited to the 3ID, or the Army for that matter.

Now, don’t get discouraged when your being encouraged doesn’t work out.  Remember a primary court-room rule:  never let them see they’ve hurt you.  Not too long ago Judge Vowell was chief in the Army’s First Judicial Circuit.  One of her rules of court was that both counsel must comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2).  Essentially she wanted a mini-brief on the experts.  Here is what she said on the record in a prior case:

MJ: I’ll tell you that in following – I learned from the judges who work for me each day, and one of them has taught me that – take a look at Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26, I believe, dealing with expert witnesses.  Be prepared to file a notice as to what the witness’s qualifications are, and the basis for the testimony.  Basically, this is a preemptive strike at the Daubert/Kumho Tire  issues.

CDC: I’m happy to hear that, Judge, because you are the first judge who I’ve ever – in all the times I’ve said, ‘Let’s go to 26,’ I’m happy to comply.

CAAF has decided United States v. Lloyd, in a 3-2 decision.  The majority determined that the defense had not sufficiently shown the need for a blood spatter expert.  Chief Judge Effron writing for himself and Judge Baker dissented.  I see this as a fact based decision and not stating any new law.

Contact Information