EXPERT BIAS AND PARTISANSHIP: A Comparison Between Australia and the Netherlands

Adversarial systems and court-centered systems approach the use of expert evidence very differently. This article focuses on the perspectives held by judges and other process participants on bias and partisanship in expert reporting in Australia and the Netherlands. It aims to provide insight into t...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Psychology, public policy, and law public policy, and law, 2005-03, Vol.11 (1), p.42-61
Main Authors: Malsch, Marijke, Freckelton, Ian
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Attitudes
Cross Cultural Differences
Expert Testimony
Human
Legal Personnel
Legal Processes
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Adversarial systems and court-centered systems approach the use of expert evidence very differently. This article focuses on the perspectives held by judges and other process participants on bias and partisanship in expert reporting in Australia and the Netherlands. It aims to provide insight into the origins of, and reasons for, bias and partisanship, focusing on psychological and psychiatric expertise. The first part of the article explains differences between adversarial and court-centered systems with respect to the involvement of experts. The second part examines judicial attitudes with respect to partisanship and bias and the way in which these issues are dealt with in the two systems. The article explores how these systems provide safeguards against partisanship by the experts.
ISSN:1076-8971
1939-1528
DOI:10.1037/1076-8971.11.1.42