Book Description:
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.
Buyback (Sell directly to one of these merchants and get cash immediately)
| Currently there are no buyers interested in purchasing this book. While the book has no cash or trade value, you may consider donating it |
Content Copyright © 1999-2013 Terms and Conditions of Use, Security and Privacy Policy | Resources: 1 2 3 | Site Map