Daubert stands for a trilogy of Supreme Court cases as well as revisions of the Federal Rules of Evidence. Together they represent American law's most recent effort to filter expert evidence offered at trial. This review begins by placing the Daubert trilogy in the context of earlier judicial...

Two of a number of hypotheses loosely referred to as the CSI Effect suggest that the television program and its spin-offs, which wildy exaggerate and glorify forensic science, affect the public, and in turn affect trials either by (a) burdening the prosecution by creating greater expectations...

A group of nonscience forensic sciences has developed over the past century. These are fields within the broader forensic sciences that have little or no basis in actual science. They are not applications of established basic sciences, they have not systematically tested their own hypotheses,...

Past attempts to better equip jurors to comprehend scientific expert testimony have shown little success. This paper describes a new approach to training jurors to be better consumers of such evidence. In addition to assessing how well can jurors differentiate between valid and flawed...

The rule of law is no simple subject; indeed, it is not even an easy task to define what "rule of law" means. Yet people go to great lengths to demonstrate their adherence to the principles of the rule of law. An underlying assumption of those who advocate a formal view of the rule of law is...

The research reported in this Article investigates jurors’ perceptions of injury seriousness and awards of general damages, and compares them to judges’ and lawyers’ responses to the same injuries. We developed regression models for each group of decision makers to determine which...