Legal representatives engage psychologists to provide expert witness opinions about a number of factors, including the psychological factors that may have contributed to the perpetrator's behaviour and the likelihood of reoffending. Although this evidence can affect the outcome of proceedings, little is known about how the experts who provide it are chosen or about the quality of their services. This paper explored legal representatives' reasons for engaging psychologists as expert witnesses, how they choose these experts, and their opinions about the expertise provided. Questions were also asked about the features of good and poor written and oral expert testimony. The results show that the majority of legal representatives engage psychologists who are usually chosen through referrals from colleagues and others. The legal representatives in the present sample had little awareness about the different backgrounds of experts (e.g. clinical vs forensic psychology). These results have implications for psychologists who provide expert evidence and the legal representatives who engage them.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6818404 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2016.1254589 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!