The Wilmington daily Republican. (Wilmington, Del.) 1890-1902, 1893-05-19
EXPERTS IN TRIALS.
THEIR CONTRADICTIONS AROUSE A
WISH FOR A CHANGE.

\ lkssq rI--tif.i7I = --
me Present Method Of Accepting Expert
Testimony In Murder Trials Does Not
Diner From That Of Taking Evidence.
Two Plans Suggested.
The question of new method Of taking
expert medical testimony is being actively
fgitated In the Academy of Medicine and
In the Society of Medical Jurisprudence,
Supreme Court Justice Willard Bartlett
and Professor Landon Carter Gray are the
leaders In the movement.
''Is reform needed. in your opinion, In
the present method Of taking expert medic
81 and chemical testimony" Dr. Gray was
asked yesterday
THE very fact that experts are so much
derided by lawyers and regarded with sus.
picion by the laity," he said, lis evidence Of
the need of a reform. Besides, those who are
thoroughly acquainted with the masters on
which experts are called to testify know
well that 1t Is the exception to the rule for
the juries to obtain the real truth about the
matter And the jurors are the Judges. In
addition, the best medical men are very re-
luctant to 60 upon the witness stand, az
they feel that their reputation, laboriously
obtained through long years, Is likely to be
jeopardized by the contradiction of some
utterly incompetent person"
as not expert testimony often rendered
practically valueless BY the contradictions
Of experts assuming to equal knowledge,
and between whom the jury ia unable to
discriminate intelligently"
Undoubtedly. That. is the reason why
think reform Is needed. The law ought
to put experts above suspicion, and it ought
to provide for some means Of discriminating
between the competency Of experts.
1.-THE present system is failure because
the experts are employed as partisans, are
expected to go into court to fight for their
own side and against the other side, and II
they maintain, as they should do, perfect
ly impartial and judicial attitude and adj
nit something that is damaging to their
side, they are considered to be disloyal.
1.-THE theory of the law is that the quail
ties of an expert can be determined by cross
examination, but this is fallacy, for there
are few lawyers-not one out of thousand
who will coach themselves for the task,
and there are even fewer lawyers who are
capable of mastering the subject in such a
short space of time"
"Whatnew plan would you suggest" DR..
Gray was asked.
II have two plans" he replied, (which
believe would go far to remedy the evils of
the present method of taking expert testi-
mony.
~ would suggest, In the first place, that
the experts in jury cases hold conference
and examine the plaintiff, either before or
during the trial Second, would suggest
that In cases tried by judge alone, the
judge select two medical men of reputation
in the branch Of medicine under discussion
to act us his medical advisers and to sit
with him on the bench for that purpose, to
be paid by the state or city
THE first plan or system of conferences
has been for many years the custom In
Leeds, England, and is spoken of by Sir
James Fitzstephen in his history of the
English criminal law as having been SO sue
cessful that the medical men are scarcely
ever cross examined, although it should be,
| think, the privilege of counsel to do this,
If they SO choose.
I'm such conference the medical men
arc almost certain to agree on the facts, as
experience has shown in England and in
Brooklyn sineeit was suggested there first
by Judge Bartlett several years ago. Judge
Bartlett has tried the plan with unvarying
success"
Would the first plan proposed by you
make it easier to get at an expert on cross
examination"
"Manifestly 1t is much easier to cross ex-
anime witness as to the validity of his
conclusions when the facts are agreed upon
than it Ii when the facts are in doubt, be
cause the conclusions are matters that can
be tested by statistics and by textbooks.
I'm the cases that are not tried by jury,
but only judge, the addition to the court
OF two medical advisers makes no changes
in the law in any essential particular, be-
cause the judge himself is not subject to
cross examination, and there is no possible
hardship in associating with him two COM
petent men to advise him, even though
they are free from liability to cross exam
nation. Moreover, the custom will not de
bar the plaintiff or the defendant from in
Producing other expert witnesses, paid by
themselves, II they choose, who can be sub
ject to the usual cross examination.
BY this double system medical men of
the highest standing will feel that they can
20 into court with dignity without the dan
ger OF having their expert knowledge sub
iected to ignorant, flippant or malicious
criticism"
Suppose the experts on jury trial could
not agree on set of facts or symptoms2"
There has never been failure to agree.
have been a member of several confer
ences of this sort, and there was no trouble
about agreeing"
How would the judge select his advis-
erssn
I'm large city like New York, unless
the judge knew some man thoroughly com
potent in the branch of medicine under dis
cussion. he could address a letter to the
president of the Academy of Medicine, who
could give him list of the best men in
| tnh fb.1. 4 -.
a new president every three years, there
could not be much cliqueism in the names
suggested.
in the smaller communities the reputa
ton OF physicians is SO well known that
the judge would have no difficulty in max.
ing proper choice"
Gould the conclusions of experts from
an agreed set OF facts or symptoms differ
very greatly"
mo, not II the experts in the conference
! were competent men.
II am not lawyer" said DR.. Gray in
conclusion, land therefore am not com.
| petent to judge of what is in accordance
with our code Of legal procedure, but real
ly believe that the best method to remedy
this evil of contradictory expert testimony
would be to create a medical Judge, with
the rank and salary of supreme court
judge He would go on circuit with the
other judges and would sit as a side Judge
in cases involving medical matters He
should be elected by the people.
Il have been told by my legal friends,
however, that this is impracticable, and i
| fear myself that the selection of such a
medical judge would have so much politics
In it as to put on the bench only the polit-
ical doctors.
"The idea of medical advisers to a Judge
was suggested to me by the fact that in the
admiralty courts in England the judge is
allowed to suggest two retired naval Off
GERS, who are called the nautical assessors,
and who sit on the bench with the Judge in
an advisory capacity, SO as to keep him
properly informed in all nautical details. ),
| New York Times.
|
| o.