The Mount Holly news. [volume] (Mount Holly, Burlington Co., N.J.) 1891-1942, 1907-07-09

NOTHING has been needed of late years
and particularly since the Thaw trial, to
increase the disrepute in which expert
testimony is held by intelligent people
generally. But much has been and still
is needed in the way of some method or
process by which the evils that arise from
the acceptance of such testimony in courts
may be eliminated. Expert testimony as
at present received in criminal and In GER
tain civil cases tends to pervert justice
and to blind the jurors to the facts, rather
than to assist them In rendering intelligent
verdicts
Justice Garrison, of the Supreme Court,
dealt such testimony severe but de-
served blow in an address recently de-
livered before the New Jersey Medical
Society at Long Branch. He spoke with
particular reference to expert medical tes-
timony, and declared that the conditions
attending exhibitions of professional ex-
pertism were intolerable He called upon
the medical profession to adopt an ethical
code that would meet and remedy them.
The courts, The said, could not correct
these evils, the doctors must do 1t them.
selves.
The line between the ordinary practic-
ing physician who is called to the witness
stand to tell the truth, and the profession.
al expert who is paid by the prosecution
or defence, and whose testimony is for the
side which pays for it, was drawn by
Justice Garrison faithfully and distinctly
The one gives his testimony conscientious
ly and truthfully, irrespective of its effect
upon the case; the other simply enters
upon business proposition and testifies
as he is hired to. Not that he necessarily
gives false testimony, but he gives only
that which is advantageous to the parties
which employ him unless the cross exam.
ination worms out of him more than he
intended
Whatever an expert says" remarked
Justice Garrison, another can be found
to contradict, and If two or three or foul
say thing to help one side, an equa
number and perhaps one more can be pro
duced to say just the opposite on the Other
side" Certainly this cannot correctly
represent the state of science in the medi
cal profession. 1t is the degradation Of
the profession by subjecting it to barte
and sale. In this, as Justice Garrison
showed. the doctor is worse than the law.
yer. The latter openly agrees to make
the best case he can for his client, but the
doctor goes on the stand, taking his oath
to tell the truth, the whole truth and
nothing but the truth. Yet what a pro-
fessional expert does is to first enter into
an agreement for so much money, to tell
only such parts of the truth as will bene-
fit one particular side.
In point of fact the expert witness sup
posed to give impartial and unbiased tes-
timony does nothing of the kind. He is
in reality not witness but an advocate.
He presents all the testimony he can, as
an expert, for one side, and none, if he
can help it, for the other Such witnesses
are also advocates in another sense, for
they often assist the lawyers in making
up the medical aspects of their cases, and
then go on the stand and testify. not in
frequently, with the intent to so bias,
mislead and prejudice the jury that they
may secure verdict and get large fees.
Expert testimony is therefore decep-
ton. 1t is prearranged, is unfair, is in
tentionally biased, is breach of sound
ethics, and it reflects on the standard of
character of the medical profession gener-
ally In the Thaw case some of the jurors
explained, after the disagreement, that
they threw 1t out altogether. They were
certainly logical Justice Garrison has
called on the medical profession to pre-
vent professional expertism. by adopting
a code which will forbid doctors from
practically becoming advocates in any
case. and then going on the stand to
testify. Professional experts are virtually
as bad as professional jurors. Both
ahould he eliminated - Ne2o17.k NeanR