Admissibility of Scientific Evidence and Expert Testimony: One Potato, Two Potato, Daubert, Frye

37 Pages Posted: 9 Jul 2010 Last revised: 30 Jun 2015

See all articles by Lynn McLain

Lynn McLain

University of Baltimore - School of Law

Date Written: September 23, 2009

Abstract

The goal of scientific research is to increase our knowledge. As knowledge grows, previously well-accepted theories are cast off and replaced by new theories, which in time may be refined or rejected. Though the world was once believed to be flat, we believe it to be rather round today. Newton’s discovery of gravity still holds, so far.

Expert testimony has been admitted in America since the 1600’s; for example, a Dr. Brown gave “scientific” testimony at a heresy trial that the defendant had “bewitched” several persons.’ How should trial judges filter which scientific and other expert evidence is admissible?

Keywords: scientific evidence, expert testimony, trials, Maryland Rules of Evidence, Federal Rules of Evidence, Frye standard, Daubert, courts

JEL Classification: K19, K29, K39, K49

Suggested Citation

McLain, Lynn, Admissibility of Scientific Evidence and Expert Testimony: One Potato, Two Potato, Daubert, Frye (September 23, 2009). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1636245 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1636245

Lynn McLain (Contact Author)

University of Baltimore - School of Law ( email )

1420 N. Charles Street
Baltimore, MD 21218
United States

Here is the Coronavirus
related research on SSRN

Paper statistics

Downloads
194
Abstract Views
874
rank
164,423
PlumX Metrics