All That Glitters Is Not Necessarily Gold: Negative Consequences of Expert Witnessing in Criminal Justice (From Expert Witnesses, P 138-153, 1987, Patrick R Anderson and L Thomas Winfree, Jr, eds. -- See NCJ-112768)

• NCJ Number: 112775
• Author(s): L T Winfree
• Date Published: 1987
• Length: 16 pages
• Sale Source: State University of New York Press
• Publication Type: Survey
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

A survey of 140 social scientists with experience as expert witnesses revealed that one in four is the victim of a problem such as harassment or reprisal in the community or workplace.

Abstract

The sample included forensic science and reputational experts as well as social scientists. A sizeable minority, between 22.2 percent and 29.3 percent, reported problems ranging from minor harassment to major reprisals. These problems were not limited to a few crazies in the community. Indeed, more experts were victimized at work than in the community at large. It appears that many experts anticipated negative consequences from their testimony, since almost half failed to mention this work in their curriculum vitae and about a quarter said they would not testify in their home towns. The results revealed that if experts possessed a propensity toward the criminal justice system, then they are candidates for problems in the community. If they exhibit propensities toward sociolegal issues, then they can expect problems in the workplace. Major reasons underlying the reluctance of some criminologists to be expert witnesses are explored. 2 footnotes and tables.