12 Pages Posted: 6 Jul 2004
There is tension between the adversarialism of the U.S. legal culture and the investigative procedures of the sciences, and between the law's concern for finality and the open-ended fallibilism of science. A long history of attempts to domesticate scientific testimony by legal rules of admissibility has left federal judges with broad screening responsibilities; recent adaptations of adversarialism in the form of court-appointed experts have been criticized as "inquisitorial," even "undemocratic." In exploring their benefits and disadvantages, it would make sense to look to the experience of other legal systems.
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Haack, Susan, Truth and Justice, Inquiry and Advocacy, Science and Law. Ratio Juris, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 15-26, March 2004. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=548091
This is a Wiley-Blackwell Publishing paper. Wiley-Blackwell Publishing charges $38.00 .
File name: raju.
If you wish to purchase the right to make copies of this paper for distribution to others, please select the quantity.