The evening times., 1899-12-18
Expert Testimony.


There has been a growing tendency OF
late 10 doubt the assumed value of the ex-
| pert witness. who has become prominent
feature in the work of the criminal courts.
| Perhaps members of the bar will resent any
reflection upon the worth of his testimony,
has had his doubts and that in most in
stances they have not been dispeled
! In a current trial which has attracted
! national attention, the prosecuting attor-
| reys are relying largely upon the deduc-
| tions OF a handwriting expert 10 prove the
| guilt of man charged with sending fatal
! dose OF poison to his alleged victim. Ii
, has been stated by the press that when the
defence has its hearing another man skilled
! in Identifying anonymous manuscript by
comparing ii 10 known samples will be
| called TO the witness stand 10 oyerturn the
, carefully formed and positive statements OF
his colleague. As this procedure is the
| usual one, the statement is entitled TO
| credit.
There is every reason to believe that the
| testimony to be offered by the expert for
The defence will be as shrewdly logical. as
| intricate in detail, and as nearly convinc-
! ing in the negative as that of his Srede-
( cesscr has been in the affirmative. BY
! the careful comparison of heoks and
I curves and alignment, the punctuation. or
lack of it, the general characteristics and
the spelling, he will doubtless endeavor TO
, demonstrate to the satisfaction of jury
, that the defendant could not possibly have
penned the discriminating writings. The
tedious deductions of the one WILL in all
probability. so far neutralize the expert
conclusions Of the other that the conyinc-
ing effect upon the jury will be lost both
by the prosecution and the defence and
tsat both sides OF the case will be. in so
far as this feature OF the evidence is con-
cerned. absolutely unaffected. The jury is
likely to quietly ignore the conflicting opin-
ions advanced by these opposing experts
for the State and for the prisoner, relying
upon its own judgment and a personal
study of the exhibits to lead ii TO a just
verdict.
The expert witness has come to be re-
sarded professionally as an indispensable
selves for the solution of the courts. but
there is smple reason for the indecision of
the unafiliated observer who asks himself
if the matter is not really cyerdone Be 1t
understood that. in the lsyman's unpreju-
diced view of the matter. there Is not the
slightest disposition to impugn the probity
or ridicule the ability of those who have
won the respect of the public because of
their shrewdness in developing knowledge
along special lines; their sincerity, it is be-
lieved. is beyond question. and is not re,e-
want 10 this discussion; but the obstinate
fact remains that, however positive the
frst-called expert may be in his opinions
on certain scientific or circumstantial de-
tails of the case on trial, another is equally |
determined in upholding the opposite view. |
II is rare indeed when the expert cannot be |
found to demolish the elaborate fabric of |
his brothers or brethren's opinions, or at |
least to throw such doubt upon their credi-
bility that their value in determining the |
issue is reduced to nothing.
None will deny that in this enlightened
day Jurisprudence must and should have |
every known facility to thoroughly sift |
every case, especially where there is life |
in the balance. in the effort to CLEAN every |
grain of truth theretrom. but there have |
been many instances where the valuable |
time and energies of the tribunal were ap-
parently FILTERED away and certain ele- |
ment OF confusion introduced, wearisome to /
the juror, tending TO cloud the points in is |
sue through bundles of technicalities and q |
tedious war of expert opinion, which |
tice of the cause. !
An expert is defined as a scientific or 1
skilled witness whose opinions on questions |
involving his art or science are received i'll
evidence: Wharton, in his Law of Evil |
dence," says that the expert gives the re-
suits of a process of reasoning which can |
be mastered only by special scientists |
While the layman is impressed by the
of the scientific witness, he
cannot ignore the fact that those in the /
same line differ absolutely on many points;
that, after one has woven the threads of |
logic and analogy concerning disputed
points into an elaborate mesh of contribu-
tory evidence, concluding with categorical
answers TO questions especially framed to |
fit the sije of the case by which he has
been summoned. he surrenders the witness
chair to an authority as eminent as he,
who calmly proceeds to unravel his gar
ment of proof. and, like the sage magi-
clan. cause it to vanish into thin air.
And yet it is difficult to determine how
the Objectionable feature of expert testimo
ny can be overcome. To deny either the
prisoner at the bar or the prosecuting at
torney the privilege of employing men who
have made study of the technical mat
ers under dispute would be an abridgment
u the rights of the accused and those q