Download Free Expert Evidence And International Criminal Justice Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Expert Evidence And International Criminal Justice and write the review.

The book is a comprehensive narration of the use of expertise in international criminal trials offering reflection on standards concerning the quality and presentation of expert evidence. It analyzes and critiques the rules governing expert evidence in international criminal trials and the strategies employed by counsel and courts relying upon expert evidence and challenges that courts face determining its reliability. In particular, the author considers how the procedural and evidentiary architecture of international criminal courts and tribunals influences the courts’ ability to meaningfully incorporate expert evidence into the rational fact-finding process. The book provides analysis of the unique properties of expert evidence as compared with other forms of evidence and the challenges that these properties present for fact-finding in international criminal trials. It draws conclusions about the extent to which particularized evidentiary rules for expert evidence in international criminal trials is wanting. Based on comparative analyses of relevant national practices, the book proposes procedural improvements to address some of the challenges associated with the use of expertise in international criminal trials.
Principles of Evidence in International Criminal Justice provides an overview of the procedure and practice concerning the admission and evaluation of evidence before the international criminal tribunals. The book is both descriptive and critical and its emphasis is on day-to-day practice, drawing on the experience of the Yugoslavia, Rwanda and Sierra Leone Tribunals. This book is an attempt to define and explain the core principles and rules that have developed at those ad hoc Tribunals; the rationale and origin of those rules; and to assess the suitability of those rules in the particular context of the International Criminal Court which is still at its early stages. The ICC differs in structure from the ad hoc Tribunals and approaches the legal issues it has to resolve differently from its predecessors. The ICC is however confronted with many of the same questions. The book examines the differences between the ad hoc Tribunals and the ICC and seeks to offer insights as to how and in which circumstances the principles established over years of practice at the ICTY, ICTR and SCSL may serve as guidance to the ICC practitioners of today and the future. The contributors represent a cross-section of the practicing international criminal bar, drawn from the ranks of the Bench, the Prosecution and the Defence and bringing with them different legal domestic cultures. Their mixed background underlines the recurring theme in this book which is the manner in which a legal culture has gradually taken shape in the international Tribunals, drawing on the various traditions and experiences of its participants.
This project addressed the admissibility of expert evidence in criminal proceedings in England and Wales. Currently, too much expert opinion evidence is admitted without adequate scrutiny because no clear test is being applied to determine whether the evidence is sufficiently reliable to be admitted. Juries may therefore be reaching conclusions on the basis of unreliable evidence, as confirmed by a number of miscarriages of justice in recent years. Following consultation on a discussion paper (LCCP 190, 2009, ISDBN 9780118404655) the Commission recommends that there should be a new reliability-based admissibility test for expert evidence in criminal proceedings. The test would not need to be applied routinely or unnecessarily, but it would be applied in appropriate cases and it would result in the exclusion of unreliable expert opinion evidence. Under the test, expert opinion evidence would not be admitted unless it was adjudged to be sufficiently reliable to go before a jury. The draft Criminal Evidence (Experts) Bill published with the report (as Appendix A) sets out the admissibility test and also provides the guidance judges would need when applying the test, setting out the key reasons why an expert's opinion evidence might be unreliable. The Bill also codifies (with slight modifications) the uncontroversial aspects of the present law, so that all the admissibility requirements for expert evidence would be set out in a single Act of Parliament and carry equal authority.
Forensic science evidence and expert witness testimony play an increasingly prominent role in modern criminal proceedings. Science produces powerful evidence of criminal offending, but has also courted controversy and sometimes contributed towards miscarriages of justice. The twenty-six articles and essays reproduced in this volume explore the theoretical foundations of modern scientific proof and critically consider the practical issues to which expert evidence gives rise in contemporary criminal trials. The essays are prefaced by a substantial new introduction which provides an overview and incisive commentary contextualising the key debates. The volume begins by placingforensic science in interdisciplinary focus, with contributions from historical, sociological, Science and Technology Studies (STS), philosophical and jurisprudential perspectives. This is followed by closer examination of the role of forensic science and other expert evidence in criminal proceedings, exposing enduring tensions and addressing recent controversies in the relationship between science and criminal law. A third set of contributions considers the practical challenges of interpreting and communicating forensic science evidence. This perennial battle continues to be fought at the intersection between the logic of scientific inference and the psychology of the fact-finder‘scommon sense reasoning. Finally, the volume‘s fourth group of essays evaluates the (limited) success of existing procedural reforms aimed at improving the reception of expert testimony in criminal adjudication, and considers future prospects for institutional renewal - with a keen eye to comparative law models and experiences, success stories and cautionary tales.
Why do international criminal tribunals write histories of the origins and causes of armed conflicts? Richard Ashby Wilson conducted research with judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys and expert witnesses in three international criminal tribunals to understand how law and history are combined in the courtroom. Historical testimony is now an integral part of international trials, with prosecutors and defense teams using background testimony to pursue decidedly legal objectives. In the Slobodan Milošević trial, the prosecution sought to demonstrate special intent to commit genocide by reference to a long-standing animus, nurtured within a nationalist mindset. For their part, the defense called historical witnesses to undermine charges of superior responsibility, and to mitigate the sentence by representing crimes as reprisals. Although legal ways of knowing are distinct from those of history, the two are effectively combined in international trials in a way that challenges us to rethink the relationship between law and history.
Contains the trial proceedings of the International Criminal Court, the ICTY and the ICTR in one single volume. This book covers the procedural and evidentiary aspects of the trials before the ICC from the beginning of an investigation until the time the convict has served the sentence and it includes ICTY and ICTR precedents.
Contains all the principles and knowledge needed to expose bogus experts and junk science and to reduce inflated expert evidence to its proper valuation.
The Realities of the International Criminal Justice System takes an analytical and critical look at the impact of the major instruments of international criminal justice since the 1990s with the advent of the International Criminal Tribunals for Rwanda and Yugoslavia.