Mar 07, 2008 19:45
The only time that I re-evaluate scenes or look at motives or think about a case beyond “what’s my deadline for getting these results back?” is when I’m called to testify in court as an expert witness.
I’ve been subpoenaed hundreds of times in my career. Normally, the process is fairly routine. The evidence that I testify about is not usually controversial. As modern science and medicine evolve, the methods we use to analyze evidence have become more and more reliable. Usually, the only time the accuracy of results is called into question is when the method is a newer one.
There are some occasions, though - when the case is a shoddy one, or when the defense attorney is hell-bent on giving the jury that shred of reasonable doubt that they need for an acquittal - where controversy cannot be avoided.
Last year’s trial of Senator Randall Bailey was the last such occasion for me, and I hope never to relive that sort of experience again. It’s one thing to see an attorney take your testimony and rip it apart. It’s quite another to accidentally do it yourself. Thanks to some shrewd lawyering, Bailey was convicted, however he could have just as easily gotten away. Just knowing that he could have is enough to make my stomach turn.
entry: open,
muse: elizabeth rodgers