The Impact of Daubert on the Admissibility of Forensic Anthropology Expert Testimony. Issue 3 (26th February 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Lesciotto, Kate M.
• Is Part Of: Journal of forensic sciences. Volume 60:Issue 3(2015)
• Page Start: 549
• Page End: 555
• Publication Date: 2015-02-26
• Subjects: Medical jurisprudence -- Periodicals; Forensic sciences -- Periodicals; Forensic Medicine -- Periodicals; Gerechtelijke geneeskunde; Gerechtelijke chemie; Gerechtelijke psychiatrie; 363.2505
• DOI: 10.1111/1556-4029.12740
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0022-1198

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="main" id="jfo12740-abs-0001"> <title>Abstract</title> <p>Forensic anthropologists anticipated a significant impact from the 1993 Supreme Court <italic>Daubert</italic> decision, which addressed the standard of admissibility for expert testimony. In response, many forensic articles cited <italic>Daubert</italic> in the search for objective techniques or a critique of established subjective methods. This study examines challenges to forensic anthropological expert testimony to evaluate whether <italic>Daubert</italic> has actually affected the admissibility of such testimony. Thirty cases were identified that addressed the admissibility of the testimony, including 14 cases prior to <italic>Daubert</italic> and 16 after <italic>Daubert</italic>. Examination of these cases indicates that post‐<italic>Daubert</italic> cases do not result in more exclusions. Yet, this lack of exclusions may instead be viewed as a manifestation of the field's overall surge toward more objective and quantifiable techniques in a self‐regulating response to <italic>Daubert</italic>.</p> </abstract>