TY  - JOUR
PY  - 2010//
TI  - Knowing How to Sleepwalk: Placing Expert Evidence in the Midst of an English Jury Trial
JO  - Science technology and human values
A1  - Scheffer, T.
SP  - 620
EP  - 644
VL  - 35
IS  - 5
N2  - In this case study I argue that experts, to gain relevance in a jury trial, need to fit into a manifold division of knowing. They do so by borrowing and sharing diverse knowledges. These exchanges place the modest expert testimony right into an authoritative and powerful decision-making apparatus. This argument derives from an ethnographic study of a "sleepwalking defense." The division of knowing embraces the certified facts, the instructed case, the competing expertise, and the common sense. As a conclusion, I identify the experts’ twofold relevance. Experts perform the case as undecided and decidable. They provide exclusive knowledge and affirm a set of other knowledges. By "knowing" and "not knowing," the experts perform individual modesty and systemic immodesty by the same token.<p />
LA  - 
SN  - 0162-2439
UR  - http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0162243909340269
ID  - ref1
ER  -