Medical product liability case lends itself as a framework on Junk Forensics use in US courts

If only there was a Rule for judges to take the time to use their own Rules on the subject of expert testimony on forensic subjects.

This brief review of a civil plantiff’s complaint (Jones) against biophosphonase maker Novartis travels through a pre-trial Daubert hearing shows us something about judicial rigor in the face of disjointed experts’s claims of proof to their opinions. It comes with a nifty graphic.

Bitemarks have faced 10 Dauberts’ in Texas. All resulted in judicial approval going to the bitemarkers. The only recent dent in this sorry judicial review is Texas Forensic Science Commission’s stance recommending its courts ban the bitemarkers out of court.

Excerpt:

The Jones court specifically recites the Daubert gatekeeping function as a mandate that the trial court conduct “an exacting analysis of the foundations of expert opinions to ensure they meet the standards for admissibility under Rule 702.” Id. at *2 quoting United States v. Abreu, 406 F.3d 1304, 1306 (11th Cir. 2005). In addition, as we noted in our recent Gorsuch article, the court must also include certain elements, i.e., a specific address to each Daubert objection raised, in the opinion granting a Daubert motion to ensure it will stand up on appeal. That’s a big job.

While the Jones opinion is well-supported and stands as a very helpful example of a thorough Daubert analysis, we’re curious whether courts are often not inclined to engage in this kind of detailed, documented review because it requires so much time, effort, and judicial resources.

Full Story

 

About csidds

Dr. Michael Bowers is a long time forensic consultant in the US and international court systems.
This entry was posted in Forensic science misconduct and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s