Citation

Lindsay RCL, MacDonald P, McGarry S. Behav. Sci. Law 1990; 8(4): 457-464.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1990, John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.1002/bsl.2370080411

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Extensive controversy over the appropriate application of expert knowledge regarding issues of eyewitness accuracy led to a conference and a special issue of taw and Human Behavior in 1986. Arguments were presented both in support of and against the eyewitness researcher as expert testifier. The current research explored the views of the general public (N = 50), defense attorneys (N = 14), and prosecutors (N = 10) with regard to the use of eyewitness expertise in each of four roles (court-appointed expert, consultant, researcher, expert tesdfier for the defense). Extensive differences of opinion were found across both samples and expert roles. In general, prosecutors held significantly more negative views of the usefulness of expert witnesses for the defense than did the public or defense attorneys. The role of court-appointed expert was viewed positively by all three groups and may present a useful alternative to the battles of experts that may result from current practices.

Language: en