Abstract

Legal systems have developed a variety of procedural mechanisms (such as expert codes of conduct, concurrent evidence, and court-appointed experts) as a response to the threat posed by partisan expert witnesses. These mechanisms aim to help keep experts under control and maintain public trust in the judicial system. These approaches have generated a significant amount of controversy in academic and professional circles, and their adoption by courts has been inconsistent. Despite this, nearly none of the points brought forth in this conversation have been supported by actual study.

Keywords

• Codes of Conduct,
• Concurrent Evidence,
• Court-Appointed Experts

References

• American Board of Forensic Neuropsychology (2016). Forensic Psychology. Retrieval from from www.abfp.com
• American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Arlington, VA: Author.
• Birgden, A., & Perlin, M. (2009). Where the home in the valley meets the damp dirty prison”: A human rights. Journal of Aggression and Violent Behavior.
• Boone, K. B. (2013). Clinical practice of forensic neuropsychology: An evidence-based approach. Oxford Academy - Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology. 28(3),
• Brod, M., Tesler, L. E., & Christiansen, T. L. (2009). Qualitative research and content validity: Developing best practices based on science and experience. Quality of Life Research, 18(9),
• Brodsky, S. L. (2013). Testifying in Court: Guidelines and Maxims for the Expert Witness, Second Edition. American Psychological Association.
• Brown, J., & Singh, J. (2014). Forensic Risk Assessment: A Beginner's Guide. Global Institute of Forensic Psychology, 1(1).
• Browning, S. L., Van Hasselt, V. B., Tucker, A. S., & Vecchi, G. M. (2011). Dealing with Individuals who have Mental Illness: The Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) in Law Enforcement. The British Journal of Forensic Practice, 13(4),
• Cattaneo, L.B., Goodman, L.A. (2010). Through the lens of therapeutic jurisprudence: the relationship between empowerment in the court system and well-being for intimate partner violence victims. journal of interpersonal violence. 25.
• Chenail, R. (2011). Interviewing the investigator: Strategies for addressing instrumentation and researcher bias concerns in qualitative research. The Qualitative Report, 16(1),
• Ciesla, K., Ioannou, M., Hammond, L. (2019). Women Offenders’ Criminal Narrative Experience. Journal of Criminal Psychology. Vol. 9
• Cook, J., Copeland, M., Jonikas, J., Hamilton, M., Razzano, L., Grey, D., et al. (2011). Results of a randomized controlled trial of mental illness self-management using wellness recovery action planning. Schizophr Bull. 38(4),.
• Correia, K. M. (2009). A handbook for correctional psychologists: Guidance for the prison practitioner, Second edition Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publisher Ltd.
• Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. SAGE Publications.
• Cropanzano, R., Stein, J. H., Nadisic, T. (2011) Justice and the Experience of Emotion. Routledge, New York
• Cross, B. (2011). Mental Health Courts Effectiveness in Reducing Recidivism and Improving Clinical Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis. University of South Florida. Graduate Theses and Dissertations.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.