Jim Henderson wrote:
> His medical expertise could also be a liability to the 
> prosecution, so add to that that he's been involved in malpractice suits 
> and he would be seen as undesirable in some instances.

Also, neither side wants an expert on the jury, as the others might give his 
opinion more weight than their own. If you have a case about someone's 
injuries, you're not going to have a doctor on the jury, because the rest of 
the jury would just defer to the doctor on the opinion of whether (say) the 
defendant was strong enough to cause that kind of injury.

They want you looking at the evidence presented, not the evidence someone 
else learned in school. :-)

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   My fortune cookie said, "You will soon be
   unable to read this, even at arm's length."

Post a reply to this message