Science In The Courtroom: What Evidence Is Admissible--And Who Decides?

Admissible--And Who Decides? Author: FRANKLIN HOKE, pp.1 Date: June 13,1994 Some scientists say a Supreme Court decision to deemphasize peer review has led to better court science Editor's Note: This article, the first of a two-part series on the role played by science--and scientists--in the court, looks at the aftermath of a pivotal case involving scientific evidence and at some of the fundamental questions raised at the junctu

Franklin Hoke
Jun 12, 1994

Admissible--
And Who Decides? Author: FRANKLIN HOKE, pp.1
Date: June 13,1994

Some scientists say a Supreme Court decision to deemphasize peer review has led to better court science
Editor's Note: This article, the first of a two-part series on the role played by science--and scientists--in the court, looks at the aftermath of a pivotal case involving scientific evidence and at some of the fundamental questions raised at the juncture between these two powerful sectors of society. The second part, to appear in the June 27 issue, will explore several ongoing projects aimed at increasing cooperation between science and law.

A landmark Supreme Court decision concerning the use of scientific evidence in legal proceedings--although handed down a year ago--is still a subject of vigorous debate among scientists and legal scholars. Observers say that one clear effect of the drug-liability case, Daubert et al. v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc., has been to...

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

Receive full access to digital editions of The Scientist, as well as TS Digest, feature stories, more than 35 years of archives, and much more!
Already a member?