When psychologists act as expert witnesses a number of issues are raised surrounding the admissibility of their evidence - Discuss these issues with reference to eyewitness testimony and domestic violence.

Authors Avatar

When psychologists act as expert witnesses a number of issues are raised surrounding the admissibility of their evidence. Discuss these issues with reference to eyewitness testimony and domestic violence, then make suggestions as to how these issues might be resolved.

In order to prosecute alleged offences, evidence such as testimony from eyewitness, fingerprint, hair, DNA, etc. which should provided in court accurately. These evidences are only allowed in legal proceedings when they are considered to be relevant (i.e. determined on the basis of the logically which is probative value of the evidence) and admissible which is legally receivable irrespective of whether or not it is logically probative. Therefore, evidence may be highly relevant but be inadmissible for legal reasons.

In case where eyewitness testimony is the sole or main evidence against an accused, then the reliability of the testimony is very important. In order to prevent a possible miscarriage of justice, the defence may call an expert witness in an attempt to warn jurors of the dangers of relying too heavily on eyewitness testimony. It is because eyewitnesses can only testify about what they have observed or what they know as fact. On the other hand, the expert witnesses may express opinion for what they possess special knowledge about a topic, or knowledge that the juror does not have.

In past, the psychiatrists were only acted as an expert witness in courtroom for testing their reliability. However, nowadays, psychologists are gradually appointing in courtroom.

Generally, psychologists have provided expert testimony on a number of different legal issues such as sentencing recommendations; the degree of psychological trauma suffered by a victim of violent crimes and the typical behavioral pattern of abused women and children. In addition, the mental state of a defendant, and whether he/she is competent to stand trial or was sane at the time of the crime was committed and the reliability of eyewitness testimony, etc.

In this essay, it will describe approaching psychologists in courtroom for expert witness and their admissibility of testimony in two main cases such as eyewitness testimony and domestic violence (e.g. battered woman syndrome). Finally, this essay will describe there are different limitation, solutions and future perspective surrounding the admissibility of expert evidence.

In the 19th century, an expert witness served the court rather than the litigants (Landsman, 1995). However, in nowadays, expert witnesses are recruited by trial attorneys and rarely by the judge. Nevertheless, the judge takes the decision as to whether expert evidence is admissible.

Normally, there are four roles of psychologists in court, which are experimental, clinical, actuarial and advisory. In experimental role, psychologists may either give evidence about general research findings such as problems with eyewitness testimony or carry out experiments that are directly relevant to the individual case. In clinical role, psychologists may typically interviewing a client and carrying out the required assessment which may include extensive psychometric testing such as tests in intelligence, personality and mental state, etc and behavioral data. Then, in actuarial role, psychologists may give evidence of a probabilistic nature to a court that is they use their psychological knowledge to inform the court of the likelihood of an event occurring. Finally, the advisory role of psychologists may advise counseling about what questions to ask when cross-examining the psychologists who are testifying for the other side.

For describing the role of psychologists as expert witnesses in courtroom and their admissibility of testimony, this essay will describe approaching with two main cases, i.e. the eyewitness testimony and domestic violence (e.g. battered woman syndrome).

Firstly, in case of eyewitness testimony, the expert does not assert an opinion about whether a particular witness is accurate. Instead, the role of the expert provides generalizations about eyewitness performance, leaving it to the jury to decide whether these factors have affected the witness’s recollection.

Then in case that related to battered woman syndrome, the expert testimony had been a primary vehicle for addressing the lack of credibility accorded battered women. The argument has been made that expert testimony is needed in order to overcome the myths and misconceptions concerning battered women, to provide fact-finders with another perspective, or a “social framework” for interpreting the woman’s actions.

Join now!

Battered woman syndrome (BWS) which is a syndrome resulting from prolonged violence and abuse of a woman by her partner that can induce a form of ‘learned helplessness’ characterized by an inability to stand up to the abuser, a feeling of dependence on the abuser, and an inability to withdraw from the situation.

In order to accept psychologists in courtroom, their testimony is very important. If expert testimony by psychologists is to be accepted then it needs to fulfill some purposes and help jurors in their decision-making. Although different emphases may be put on these questions depending upon ...

This is a preview of the whole essay