Confronting experts in court could be a very challenging task. Inexperienced lawyers always found it very difficult to break the evidence of expert witnesses. Evidence sought from expert witnesses during trial normally involved forensic or scientific evidence. Many young and inexperienced lawyers may just let lose the expert to give evidence without even be bothered to cross-examine the expert or without testing the expert’s knowledge of his expertise. Judges may often be caught too and may also tend to believe the testimonies of experts. Evidence by expert witnesses were normally taken prima facie credible and accused persons could be convicted on evidence of experts unless evidence of experts could be rebutted or be contradicted during cross-examinations or trial. This is because most lawyers are not trained in the areas the experts whose expertise was sought in court.
How A Good Lawyer Can Shake Up Expert’s Evidence
In a trial, a good trial lawyer who knows his trade well could at times be able to shake the evidence of the expert during cross-examination with a few tricks to destroy the confidence of the expert when the expert gives his expert testimony.
One of the tricks a good trial lawyer could be seen doing during trial is to carry stakes of books and documents on the related field the expert has to testify. This method could help the lawyer to gain some psychological upper hand over the expert. An inexperienced expert could be trapped or lose his confidence when the lawyer be seen regularly flipping the books open or pulling the pages open, scanning and then asking a probing question. The expert in the dock could be shaken or feel intimidated when shown books or materials inside the books although the pages or materials shown may have very little relevance to the matter under cross-examination. When under pressure, the expert could be confused and may just give in to what the lawyer wants. This is because not all experts are truly experts in the field in question before the court.
During trial, a good trial lawyer will produce from the documents or books for the confirmation of the expert some compelling counterpoints to the testimony of the expert. Such a trick or tactic can embarrass an inexperienced expert. A good trial lawyer will normally produce work of experts that are known to the expert in the witness box, but, whose work the expert had not read. Some pages of the books brought along to court were marked with markers and would convincing tell the expert that the lawyer who examined him was equally prepared or equally knowledgeable in the field of evidence the expert was testifying. From forensic or scientific books on display an inexperienced expert may tend to agree with the trial lawyer that the writers of the books shown to him were all better experts with better credentials than him. This will in turn gives an impression to the court that the expert’s expertise in the field the expert is testifying is limited.
_______________________________
Facing a trial with expert witnesses? Share your experience with us on our Facebook’s page: www.facebook.com/voonslaw
