Is Your Expert Witnessing prepared
for a Daubert/Kumho Challenge?
or "Effective Testimony under Daubert/Kumho"
Paschal Baute, Ed. D., DACFE, DABPS
This paper surveys a brief historical perspective of what has been
accepted as valid scientific testimony of experts since Frye in 1923,
then discusses the new Supreme Court 1993 Daubert standard of four rules,
examines how the courts are modifying these rules, as modified by some
recent key decisions such as Kumho, suggests new guidelines for the expert
under Daubert/Kumho, describes how attorneys are now assessing expert testimony
and which factors can enhance or undermine reliability and validity, suggests
what should be included in the expert's report, some further expected Daubert/Kumho
outcomes, variability in judicial acceptance, lists guidelines and resources
for further understanding, explores implications for the professions using
a medical model, and views the professional conduct and commitment expected.
Daubert/Kumho brings order out of chaos, and sustains a rigorous analysis
of scientific evidence.