🔑 Key Definitions
Expert Witness 👤: Someone with specialized knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education that qualifies them to offer opinions beyond common understanding
Frye Standard (1923) 📜: Scientific evidence must be "generally accepted" in scientific community
Daubert Standard (1993) ⚖️: Judge as "gatekeeper" - evaluates if testimony is testable, peer-reviewed, known error rate, generally accepted
📅 Important Dates
- 1923 - Frye Standard established
- 1993 - Daubert Standard established (US federal courts)
🎭 5 Roles of Forensic Psychologists in Court
- 1. Competency evaluations - Fitness to stand trial
- 2. Insanity evaluations - Mental state at time of offense
- 3. Risk assessment - Future violence/dangerousness
- 4. Child custody - Parental fitness, child needs
- 5. Psychological injury - Emotional damages in civil cases
🏛️ Expert Witness Process (4 Steps)
- 1. Receiving referral - Assess expertise match, conflicts of interest
- 2. Case review & assessment - Records, interview, testing, collateral info
- 3. Report writing - Clear, comprehensive, defensible
- 4. Giving testimony - Deposition or live trial
⚖️ Daubert Criteria (4)
- Can the theory be TESTED?
- Has it been PEER-REVIEWED?
- Known ERROR RATE?
- GENERALLY ACCEPTED?
🎯 3 Prediction Approaches
- Actuarial - Statistical algorithms, MORE accurate, may miss individual factors
- Clinical - Professional judgment, flexible but MORE bias prone
- Structured Professional Judgment - BEST of both!
⚖️ Ethical Considerations
- Remain OBJECTIVE - not advocate for retaining party
- Opinions based on DATA and SCIENCE
- Acknowledge LIMITATIONS
- Avoid dual roles (therapist shouldn't be expert witness for own patient)
💡 Exam Tips
- Frye (1923) = "generally accepted" | Daubert (1993) = judge as gatekeeper
- Daubert criteria: testable, peer-reviewed, error rate, acceptance
- Structured Professional Judgment = best approach (combines actuarial + clinical)
- Expert vs Ordinary witness: experts CAN offer opinions, ordinary CANNOT
- Avoid advocacy - remain objective!
- Cross-examination = opposing counsel tries to discredit