Redmayne, Mike, Roberts, Paul, Aitken, Colin and Jackson, Graham (2011) Forensic science evidence in question. Criminal Law Review, 2011 (5). pp. 347-356. ISSN 0011-135X
Abstract
Analyses the Court of Appeal judgment in R. v T in which the court in remarking on shoeprint comparison evidence considered how expert witnesses, in particular forensic scientists, should present their evidence in court and the types and quality of the data they can draw on when formulating their conclusions. Identifies what the court had to say about the methodology employed by the expert witness, in particular the use of likelihood ratios. Emphasises positive features of the judgment, rejecting interpretations which threaten to diminish the integrity and distort the probative value of scientific evidence.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Official URL: | http://www.sweetandmaxwell.co.uk/Catalogue/Product... |
| Additional Information: | © 2011 Sweet & Maxwell |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | forensic evidence, forensic science, statistical evidence |
| Library of Congress subject classification: | H Social Sciences > HV Social pathology. Social and public welfare. Criminology K Law > K Law (General) |
| Sets: | Departments > Law Research centres and groups > Mannheim Centre for Criminology |
| Rights: | http://www.lse.ac.uk/library/rights/LSERO.htm |
| URL: | http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/36283/ |
Actions (login required)
 |
Record administration - authorised staff only |
