Judge Warns About Expert Witness Evidence
- Details
- Published: Sunday, 10 August 2025 17:10
- Written by News Editor
- Hits: 1242
A prominent judge on the Supreme Court has issued crucial guidance for the legal profession. He emphasises the need for heightened vigilance in the handling of expert witness evidence. This is because the intricate nature of contemporary legal cases has resulted in expert witnesses assuming a more significant role than ever before.
Patrick Hodge, the deputy president of the Supreme Court and the president of the Expert Witness Institute, elucidates that advancements in technology and medical science have rendered these matters more expert-driven than ever. However, it is imperative to refrain from blind acceptance of expert witnesses. Their evidence should be approached with caution. This notemay very well have an impact on cases in the future, and would hopefully filter into the GDC legal arena.
The role of a judge entails maintaining vigilance and ensuring that the expert witness possesses the requisite qualifications to provide an opinion on the subject matter. A judge must self-reflect and ascertain whether their experience justifies their ability to express an opinion on that particular issue.
Senior politicians, legal professionals, and medical experts have also expressed concerns regarding the absence of adequate oversight and regulation in the utilisation of expert witnesses. These experts present evidence in court on subjects that transcend the knowledge of judges or juries. Their evidence can be pivotal in determining the outcome of certain cases, and regrettably, there have been instances where mishandled expert evidence has resulted in miscarriages of justice.
A notable case in this regard is that of Lucy Letby, the neonatal nurse who was convicted of murdering seven infants. This case has prompted renewed scrutiny of expert witnesses, and lawyers challenging her conviction assert that the expert evidence presented at her trial was flawed.
The Expert Witness Institute, a non-profit organisation established in 1996, provides training and membership to experts based on their relevant experience. They also maintain a directory of vetted experts. It is important to note that there is no obligation for lawyers to utilise the service or any similar schemes.
Their conclusion, it is imperative that lawyers and judges enhance their “scientific and technical literacy” to avoid a complete lack of understanding of various subjects and excessive reliance on expert witness evidence. This will ensure that justice is impartially served and the risk of miscarriages of justice is effectively mitigated.
“There is a persistent concern about miscarriages of justice,” the esteemed speaker remarked. “Even the most expert and impartial individuals can make errors, and the court may not be fully cognizant of these potential lapses.”
Furthermore, the speaker highlighted the issue of individuals claiming expertise in pseudoscience, which judges must be equipped to identify and challenge.
Julie Maxton, the executive director of the Royal Society (the United Kingdom’s national academy of sciences), underscored the growing popularity of resources that assist judges in comprehending the scientific topics frequently encountered in courtrooms. The Royal Society organises seminars and provides guides tailored to judges on a diverse range of subjects, including the application of statistics and substance addiction, ballistics, and DNA analysis.
“In the United Kingdom, the majority of individuals who pursue a legal career do not undertake scientific A-level examinations,” she explained. Consequently, they may have been somewhat out of touch with scientific advancements, which are subject to continuous evolution.
“Our intention is not to transform judges into scientists, and we are fully cognizant that expert witnesses have a primary obligation to the court to ensure accuracy. However, we acknowledge that, occasionally, experts may make mistakes.”
You need to be logged in to leave comments.
Report
My comments