Since 1993 Supreme Court precedent has asked judges to serve as gatekeepers to their expert witnesses admitting only reliable scientific testimony. Lacking a strong background in science however some judges admit dubious scientific testimony packages by articulate practitioners while others reject reliable evidence that is unreasonably portrayed as full of holes. Seeking a balance between undue deference and undeserved skepticism Caudill and LaRue draw on the philosophy of science to help judges juries and advocates better understand its goals and limitations.
Piracy-free
Assured Quality
Secure Transactions
*COD & Shipping Charges may apply on certain items.