Forensic science evidence and the limits of cross-examination

Edmond, Gary, Cunliffe, Emma, Martire, Kristy A. and San Roque, Mehera (2019) Forensic science evidence and the limits of cross-examination. Melbourne University Law Review, 42 (3). pp. 858-920. ISSN 0025-8938

Preview	Text (Final published version) 05-Edmond-et-al.pdf - Published Version Download (461kB) | Preview
Preview	Text (Advance online version) Edmond et al 01 Advance.pdf - Published Version Download (466kB) | Preview

Abstract

The ability to confront witnesses through cross-examination is conventionally understood as the most powerful means of testing evidence, and one of the most important features of the adversarial trial. Popularly feted, cross-examination was immortalised in John Henry Wigmore’s (1863–1943) famous dictum that it is ‘the greatest legal engine ever invented for the discovery of truth’. Through a detailed review of the cross-examination of a forensic scientist, in the first scientifically-informed challenge to latent fingerprintevidence in Australia, this article offers a more modest assessment of its value. Drawing upon mainstream scientific research and advice, and contrasting scientific knowledge with answers obtained through cross-examination of a latent fingerprint examiner, it illuminates a range of serious and apparently unrecognised limitations with our current procedural arrangements. The article explains the limits of cross-examination and the difficulties trial and appellate judges — and by extension juries — experience when engaging with forensic science evidence.

Actions (login required)

View Item

Downloads