| Preface |
|
xxi | |
| Acknowledgments |
|
xxv | |
|
Chapter 1 Introduction to Science and the Legal Process |
|
|
1 | (28) |
|
I The Judge as Arbiter of Science |
|
|
2 | (5) |
|
Daubert v. MerrellDow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. |
|
|
2 | (4) |
|
|
|
6 | (1) |
|
II How Scientists Think About Science |
|
|
7 | (11) |
|
A The Philosophy of Science |
|
|
7 | (1) |
|
David Goodstein, How Science Works |
|
|
7 | (5) |
|
|
|
12 | (2) |
|
B The Scientific Ideal in Practice |
|
|
14 | (1) |
|
David W. Peterson and John M. Conley, Of Cherries, Fudge, and Onions: Science and Its Courtroom Perversion |
|
|
14 | (3) |
|
|
|
17 | (1) |
|
III How the Courts Understand Science: Irreconcilable Differences? |
|
|
18 | (11) |
|
Moore v. Ashland Chemical, Inc. |
|
|
19 | (4) |
|
|
|
23 | (2) |
|
|
|
25 | (4) |
|
Chapter 2 Opinion Evidence: Rules and Cases |
|
|
29 | (108) |
|
|
|
29 | (40) |
|
A Distinguishing Between Lay and Expert Opinions: FRE 701 and Cases |
|
|
29 | (2) |
|
United, States v. Martinez-Figueroa |
|
|
31 | (2) |
|
|
|
33 | (3) |
|
B Distinguishing Lay from Expert Opinion: The Business-Owner Exception |
|
|
36 | (1) |
|
James River Insurance Company v. Rapid Funding, LLC |
|
|
36 | (9) |
|
|
|
45 | (1) |
|
C Rule 702, Testimony By Experts |
|
|
45 | (1) |
|
1 Specialized Knowledge and Helpfulness |
|
|
45 | (1) |
|
|
|
46 | (5) |
|
|
|
51 | (1) |
|
|
|
51 | (3) |
|
|
|
54 | (4) |
|
|
|
58 | (1) |
|
Ralston v. Smith & Nephew Richards, Inc. |
|
|
59 | (4) |
|
|
|
63 | (1) |
|
McCullock v. H.B. Fuller Co. |
|
|
64 | (3) |
|
|
|
67 | (2) |
|
II Standards of Admissibility |
|
|
69 | (54) |
|
A The "General Acceptance" Standard |
|
|
70 | (1) |
|
|
|
70 | (1) |
|
|
|
71 | (1) |
|
|
|
71 | (5) |
|
|
|
76 | (1) |
|
1 The Post-Frye Developments |
|
|
77 | (1) |
|
|
|
77 | (4) |
|
B The Reliability Standard--The Supreme Court Trilogy on Expert Evidence |
|
|
81 | (1) |
|
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. |
|
|
81 | (11) |
|
|
|
92 | (6) |
|
General Electric Co. v. Joiner |
|
|
98 | (4) |
|
|
|
102 | (3) |
|
Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael |
|
|
105 | (7) |
|
|
|
112 | (2) |
|
C Rule 702 and the Daubert Trilogy: Putting It All Together |
|
|
114 | (1) |
|
Murray v. Southern Route Maritime SA |
|
|
115 | (7) |
|
|
|
122 | (1) |
|
III Additional Rules and Considerations |
|
|
123 | (14) |
|
A Basis of Knowledge for an Expert's Opinion: FRE 703 and Cases |
|
|
123 | (1) |
|
Ferrara & DiMercurio v. St. Paul Mercury Insurance Company |
|
|
123 | (4) |
|
|
|
127 | (1) |
|
B Ultimate Issue Testimony: FRE 704 |
|
|
128 | (1) |
|
|
|
128 | (1) |
|
United States v. Noel, 581 F.3d 490 |
|
|
129 | (4) |
|
|
|
133 | (1) |
|
|
|
133 | (1) |
|
C Disclosure of Facts or Data Underlying Expert Opinion: FRE 705 |
|
|
134 | (1) |
|
D Rule
706. Court Appointed Expert Witnesses |
|
|
134 | (3) |
|
Chapter 3 Statistical Inference |
|
|
137 | (46) |
|
I Collecting Data: Populations and Samples |
|
|
140 | (5) |
|
United States ex rel. Free v. Peters |
|
|
141 | (1) |
|
Amstar Corp. v. Domino's Pizza, Inc. |
|
|
142 | (2) |
|
|
|
144 | (1) |
|
II Analyzing Samples: Confidence Intervals |
|
|
145 | (5) |
|
United States ex rel. Free v. Peters |
|
|
147 | (1) |
|
|
|
148 | (2) |
|
III Statistical Significance: Standard Deviations and P-Values |
|
|
150 | (19) |
|
|
|
151 | (1) |
|
|
|
152 | (3) |
|
|
|
155 | (4) |
|
|
|
159 | (2) |
|
|
|
161 | (6) |
|
|
|
167 | (2) |
|
|
|
169 | (6) |
|
|
|
169 | (4) |
|
|
|
173 | (2) |
|
|
|
175 | (8) |
|
McReynolds v. Sodexho Marriott Servs. |
|
|
175 | (3) |
|
|
|
178 | (5) |
|
|
|
183 | (50) |
|
I The Scientific Background |
|
|
184 | (13) |
|
|
|
184 | (1) |
|
John M. Conley and Roberte Makowski, Back to the Future: Rethinking the Product of Nature Doctrine as a Barrier to Biotechnology Patents |
|
|
184 | (1) |
|
David H. Kaye and George F. Sensabaugh, Jr., Reference Guide on DNA Evidence |
|
|
185 | (2) |
|
|
|
187 | (1) |
|
B The Science of DNA Profiling |
|
|
188 | (1) |
|
|
|
188 | (2) |
|
David H. Kaye and George F. Sensabaugh, Jr., Reference Guide on DNA Evidence |
|
|
190 | (1) |
|
|
|
191 | (4) |
|
David H. Kaye and George F. Sensabaugh, Jr., Reference Guide on DNA Evidence |
|
|
195 | (2) |
|
|
|
197 | (36) |
|
William C. Thompson and Dan E. Krane, DNA in the Courtroom |
|
|
197 | (1) |
|
|
|
198 | (1) |
|
|
|
198 | (2) |
|
|
|
200 | (1) |
|
B The Probability of a Random Match--Compared to What? |
|
|
201 | (1) |
|
|
|
201 | (1) |
|
|
|
202 | (2) |
|
|
|
204 | (3) |
|
C The Probability of a Random Match--The Statistics |
|
|
207 | (1) |
|
|
|
207 | (3) |
|
|
|
210 | (3) |
|
D Problems with DNA Evidence |
|
|
213 | (1) |
|
|
|
213 | (3) |
|
|
|
216 | (3) |
|
E Mitochondrial DNA Evidence |
|
|
219 | (1) |
|
William C. Thompson and Dan E. Krane, DNA in the Courtroom |
|
|
219 | (1) |
|
|
|
220 | (5) |
|
|
|
225 | (1) |
|
F The Supreme Court Weighs In |
|
|
225 | (1) |
|
|
|
225 | (8) |
|
Chapter 5 Social Science, Behavioral Science, and Neuroscience Expert Evidence |
|
|
233 | (102) |
|
I Expert Testimony about Frameworks, Syndromes, and Profiles |
|
|
234 | (53) |
|
|
|
234 | (1) |
|
Laurens Walker and John Monahan, Social Frameworks: A New Use of Social Science in Law |
|
|
234 | (2) |
|
|
|
236 | (3) |
|
|
|
239 | (8) |
|
|
|
247 | (1) |
|
|
|
248 | (9) |
|
|
|
257 | (1) |
|
|
|
258 | (1) |
|
1 Child Sexual Abuse Evidence |
|
|
258 | (1) |
|
State v. J.L. G., a/k/a J.L.J. |
|
|
258 | (10) |
|
|
|
268 | (1) |
|
2 Expert Testimony About Intimate Partner Violence ("Battering") |
|
|
268 | (1) |
|
|
|
269 | (5) |
|
|
|
274 | (2) |
|
C Profile Testimony: Child Sexual Abuse |
|
|
276 | (1) |
|
|
|
276 | (8) |
|
|
|
284 | (3) |
|
|
|
287 | (1) |
|
A Expert Evidence on the Issue of Sanity |
|
|
287 | (1) |
|
|
|
288 | (6) |
|
|
|
294 | (4) |
|
III Expert Testimony about Mental Competence |
|
|
298 | (9) |
|
|
|
298 | (8) |
|
|
|
306 | (1) |
|
IV Predictions of Future Dangerousness |
|
|
307 | (13) |
|
|
|
307 | (11) |
|
|
|
318 | (2) |
|
V Expert Testimony about Neuroscience & Neuroimaging |
|
|
320 | (15) |
|
Owen D. Jones, Joshua W. Buckholtz, Jeffrey D. Schall, and Rene Marois, Brain Imaging for Legal Thinkers: A Guide for the Perplexed |
|
|
321 | (5) |
|
J.C. Moriarty, Flickering Admissibility: Neuroimaging Evidence in the U.S. Courts |
|
|
326 | (1) |
|
United States v. Mezvinsky |
|
|
327 | (4) |
|
|
|
331 | (4) |
|
Chapter 6 Forensic Science |
|
|
335 | (64) |
|
I Introduction and Explanations |
|
|
335 | (2) |
|
II Identification of Evidence |
|
|
337 | (3) |
|
David H. Kaye, David E. Bernstein, and Jennifer L. Mnookin, The New Wigmore: A Treatise on Evidence: Expert Evidence |
|
|
337 | (1) |
|
Jane Campbell Moriarty & Michael J. Saks, Forensic Science: Grand Goals, Tragic Flaws & Judicial Gatekeeping |
|
|
337 | (3) |
|
III Individualization/Feature Comparison Methods: Handwriting Comparison, Fingerprint Evidence, and Toolmarks |
|
|
340 | (12) |
|
|
|
341 | (8) |
|
|
|
349 | (3) |
|
IV The NAS and PCAST Reports on Forensic Science: A New Era? |
|
|
352 | (28) |
|
National Research Council of the National Academies, trengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward |
|
|
352 | (2) |
|
|
|
354 | (3) |
|
National Research Council of the National Academies, Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward |
|
|
357 | (2) |
|
President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, Report to the President, Forensic Science in Criminal Courts: Ensuring Scientific Validity of Feature-Comparison Methods |
|
|
359 | (3) |
|
United States v. Bonds (2017) |
|
|
362 | (4) |
|
United States v. Bonds (2019) |
|
|
366 | (2) |
|
|
|
368 | (1) |
|
|
|
369 | (1) |
|
United States v. Smallwood |
|
|
369 | (6) |
|
|
|
375 | (1) |
|
B The Confrontation Clause and Forensic Science Evidence |
|
|
375 | (1) |
|
Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts |
|
|
375 | (4) |
|
|
|
379 | (1) |
|
V Determinations of the Cause and Manner of Death |
|
|
380 | (19) |
|
|
|
383 | (6) |
|
|
|
389 | (7) |
|
|
|
396 | (3) |
|
Chapter 7 Medical Causation |
|
|
399 | (74) |
|
I How do you Prove that an Exposure Caused an Outcome? Epidemiology, Toxicology, and Differential Diagnosis |
|
|
400 | (2) |
|
Turpin v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. |
|
|
401 | (1) |
|
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. |
|
|
401 | (1) |
|
II Proving General Causation: Epidemiology |
|
|
402 | (11) |
|
Michael D. Green, D. Michal Freedman, and Leon Gordis, Reference Guide on Epidemiology |
|
|
403 | (6) |
|
In re "Agent Orange" Product Liability Litigation |
|
|
409 | (2) |
|
|
|
411 | (2) |
|
III Moving From General to Specific Causation |
|
|
413 | (33) |
|
In re Hanford Nuclear Reservation Litigation |
|
|
414 | (1) |
|
A Using Enhanced Evidence of General Causation to Prove Specific Causation |
|
|
415 | (1) |
|
David A. Freedman and Philip B. Stark, The Swine Flu Vaccine and Guillain-Barre Syndrome: A Case Study in Relative Risk and Specific Causation |
|
|
415 | (1) |
|
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. |
|
|
416 | (2) |
|
|
|
418 | (2) |
|
|
|
420 | (1) |
|
Bernard D. Goldstein and Mary Sue Henifin, Reference Guide on Toxicology |
|
|
420 | (4) |
|
General Electric Company v. Joiner |
|
|
424 | (4) |
|
|
|
428 | (4) |
|
C Proving Specific Causation Through Differential Diagnosis |
|
|
432 | (1) |
|
|
|
432 | (5) |
|
Moore v. Ashland Chemical, Inc. |
|
|
437 | (6) |
|
|
|
443 | (3) |
|
IV Injuries Allegedly Caused by Doctors and Medical Devices |
|
|
446 | (8) |
|
Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc. |
|
|
447 | (4) |
|
|
|
451 | (3) |
|
V Review Exercise: The Breast Implant Controversy |
|
|
454 | (19) |
|
Silicone Breast Implants in Relation to Connective Tissue Diseases and Immunologic Dysfunction |
|
|
455 | (3) |
|
Hall v. Baxter Healthcare Corp. |
|
|
458 | (15) |
|
Chapter 8 Economic Analysis of Liability and Damages |
|
|
473 | (34) |
|
I The Value of a Working Life |
|
|
474 | (14) |
|
McCrann v. United States Lines, Inc. |
|
|
475 | (4) |
|
|
|
479 | (5) |
|
Har-Pen Truck Lines, Inc. v. Mills |
|
|
484 | (2) |
|
|
|
486 | (2) |
|
|
|
488 | (10) |
|
In re Radiology Assoc., Inc. |
|
|
488 | (9) |
|
|
|
497 | (1) |
|
III Modeling Markets in Antitrust Cases |
|
|
498 | (9) |
|
In re Industrial Silicon Antitrust Litigation |
|
|
498 | (4) |
|
|
|
502 | (5) |
|
Chapter 9 Reconstructing Accidents and Crime Scenes |
|
|
507 | (62) |
|
I Experiments, Videotapes, and Computer-Generated Evidence |
|
|
508 | (18) |
|
Richard K. Sherwin, Neal Feigenson, and Christina Spiesel, Law in the Digital Age: How Visual Communication Technologies Are Transforming the Practice, Theory, and Teaching of Law |
|
|
508 | (2) |
|
Fred Galves, Where the Not-So-Wild Things Are: Computers in the Courtroom, the Federal Rules of Evidence, and the Need for Insdtutional Reform and More Judicial Acceptance |
|
|
510 | (2) |
|
Carrie Leonetti and Jeremy Bailenson, High-Tech Views: The Immersive Virtual Environments injury Trials |
|
|
512 | (3) |
|
|
|
515 | (5) |
|
Muth v. Ford Motor Company |
|
|
520 | (4) |
|
|
|
524 | (2) |
|
II Essential Considerations for Accident Reconstruction: Foundation, Qualifications, and Speculation |
|
|
526 | (25) |
|
Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael |
|
|
526 | (6) |
|
|
|
532 | (1) |
|
Brooks v. Outboard Marine Corporation |
|
|
532 | (3) |
|
|
|
535 | (2) |
|
A Cause and Origin of Fire |
|
|
537 | (1) |
|
John J. Lentini, Modern Scientific Evidence: The Law and Science of Expert Testimony |
|
|
537 | (2) |
|
Larsen v. 401 Main Street |
|
|
539 | (6) |
|
|
|
545 | (3) |
|
B Accident Investigation and Reconstruction |
|
|
548 | (1) |
|
|
|
548 | (2) |
|
|
|
550 | (1) |
|
III Crime Scene Reconstruction |
|
|
551 | (18) |
|
|
|
552 | (7) |
|
|
|
559 | (7) |
|
|
|
566 | (3) |
| Table of Cases |
|
569 | (6) |
| Index |
|
575 | |
![Scientific and Expert Evidence: [ Connected Ebook] 3rd ed.](https://d33318exxque5k.cloudfront.net/covers/large/978145/9781454897927.1620946355.jpg)