Abertay Research Collections >
School of Science, Engineering & Technology >
Science Engineering & Technology Collection >
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title: ||Evidence evaluation: a response to the court of appeal judgment in R v T|
|Authors: ||Berger, Charles E. H.|
Evett, Ian W.
|Affiliation: ||University of Abertay Dundee. School of Contemporary Sciences|
|Keywords: ||Forensic science|
|Issue Date: ||Jun-2011|
|Type: ||Journal Article|
|Rights: ||Published version (c)Elsevier, available from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2011.03.005|
|Citation: ||Berger, C.E.H., et al. 2011. Evidence evaluation: a response to the court of appeal judgment in R v T. Science & Justice. 51(2): pp.43-49. Available from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2011.03.005|
|Abstract: ||This is a discussion of a number of issues that arise from the recent judgment in R v T . Although the judgment concerned with footwear evidence, more general remarks have implications for all disciplines within forensic science. Our concern is that the judgment will be interpreted as being in opposition to the principles of logical interpretation of evidence. We re-iterate those principles and then discuss several extracts from the judgment that may be potentially harmful to the future of forensic science. A position statement with regard to evidence evaluation, signed by many forensic scientists, statisticians and lawyers, has appeared in this journal  and the present paper expands on the points made in that statement.|
|Appears in Collections:||Science Engineering & Technology Collection|
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.