Peer-Reviewed Forensic Consultation: Safeguarding Expert Testimony and Protecting the Uninformed Court

• NCJ Number: 239109
• Journal: Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice Volume: 12 Issue: 1 Dated: January-February 2012 Pages: 1-34
• Author(s): Michael Welner, M.D.; Theresa Mastellon, M.A.; Jada J. Stewart, M.A.; Briana Weinert, M.A.; John M. B. Stratton, M.A.
• Date Published: February 2012
• Length: 34 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Research (Applied/Empirical)
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

This study examined the peer reviewed forensic science.

Abstract

Criticisms of the ethical and professional shortcomings of forensic consultation and expert testimony have long been the burden of forensic science. The very necessity of forensic science expertiseproviding specialized knowledge to the courts where judges and juries lack such traininghas enabled unscientific or Machiavellian expert testimony to contaminate or derail justice. Accountability is lacking within forensic science consultation and especially in the mental health disciplines. Advances of recent years demonstrate different ways forensic science consultation incorporates peer review. Peer-reviewed forensic science is an important methodological solution for ineffective and unethical forensic science assessment, promoting integrity, quality, and confidence in justice. (Published Abstract)