News reports about a proffered memory Expert are featured here in an October 28, 2006 post. Yesterday, the Federal District Judge ruled in that criminal case that a memory Expert would not be allowed to testify. The Judge agreed with the Federal Government prosecutors who argued that the proposed Expert testimony would not assist the jury in understanding or in determining any of the facts at issue in Download United_States_of_America_v. I. Lewis Libby (D.D.C. Criminal Case No. 05-394, Opinion Filed Thursday, November 2, 2006).pdf. (This linked and fuzzy posting comes directly from the Federal Court.)
The Judge referred to a case called Daubert in the conclusion of his long opinion. Daubert was decided 10 years ago by the Supreme Court of the United States. In it, the High Court designated each Federal Trial Judge a "gatekeeper" over the question of whether a jury should hear Expert testimony. (This is one answer by the Supreme Court to the supposed problem, at one time, of Experts testifying to too much "junk science".)
The Federal District Judge wrote yesterday: "To permit the introduction of the testimony proposed by the defendant would be an abdication of that responsibility and would therefore leave the gate this Court is obligated to protect unguarded and without a sentry. This the Court cannot do, in light of the mandate given to it by the highest Court in the land."
REMINDER:
THE CONTENTS OF THIS BLOG DO NOT MAKE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP.
ALWAYS CONSULT THE CASES AND LAWS OF EACH PARTICULAR JURISDICTION AND
AN ATTORNEY IN AND FAMILIAR WITH THE PARTICULAR LEGAL ISSUE, THE
JURISDICTION AND ITS LAWS, WHENEVER YOU TRY TO ADDRESS OR RESOLVE ANY
LEGAL QUESTION.
Comments