Report Writing and Courtroom Testimony

1. Report Writing and Courtroom Testimony Iowa State University Computer and Network Forensics CprE 592-YG October 23, 2003 By Sandra J. Stoltenow, Criminalist Supervisor Iowa DCI Lab

2. Report Writing • Document chain-of-custody • List and describe items examined • Describe methods of examination, if appropriate • State results of examination • State significance of results • Special interpretations • Disposition of evidence

3. List and describe items examined • Can be delegated to submitter • Submission form • Receipt form May need to be corrected or supplemented

4. Describe methods of examination, if appropriate Preparation Instrumentation Destructive or nondestructive Suitability to be re-examined by another expert

5. State results of examination • Use layman’s terms if at all possible • Graphics or tables are helpful • Be clear and concise • Explain limitations

6. State significance of results • Exhibit A and B were identical and likely have a common source • Because the genetic profile of the suspect does not match the semen on the victim’s vaginal swab, this suspect is eliminated as the semen donor. • The suspect was in contact with the victim by e-mail.

7. Special interpretations • Assuming a 40% yield, the precursors found in the defendant’s apartment could have made 15 grams of pure methamphetamine. • Seminal fluid from an additional, unknown male was identified on the vaginal swab.

8. Disposition of evidence The Macintosh Computer (serial number 45689) is being returned under separate cover by Federal Express number 1234. The hard drives labeled Exhibits 14-20 are being forwarded to ABC Data Recovery at the request of the plaintiff. The server described above is available to be returned to your office at your convenience.

9. Purpose of a Report • Notify the submitter of the progress of the analysis • Can stand alone

10. Courtroom Testimony “In science the credit goes to the man who convinces the world, not the man to whom the idea first occurs.” Sir Francis Drake “Science advances toward truth though never arriving at certainty.” Unknown

11. Outline • The American Adversary System • Terms • Expert Testimony • Frye v. United States • Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals inc. • Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael

12. The American Adversary System • Cases are heard by a neutral and passive decision maker • Setting is highly structured • Evidence is usually presented by lay witnesses who must testify based on personal knowledge (expert witnesses are exception).

13. Terms • Minutes of testimony • Subpoena • Interogatory • Deposition • Duces Tecum • Opening Statement • Direct Exam • Voir dire • Cross Exam • Re-direct, Re-cross, etc. • Sequestered

14. More Terms • Sustained • Over ruled • Multifaceted questions • Chain of Custody

15. Expert Testimony • Only expert witnesses are allowed to testify to matters they did not directly perceive. • The subject must be outside the general knowledge of lay jurors. • It must involve “scientific, technical, or specialized knowledge” such that it would assist the jury to have an expert explain. • The witness must have sufficient training and experience.

16. Frye • Excluded testimony about a primitive polygraph • Science can be used in the courtroom only if the procedure is “sufficiently established to have gained general acceptance in the particular field in which it belongs.” • When is Frye applicable? • What is meant by general acceptance? • Which scientific community? • How do you accommodate new advances?

17. Federal Rules of Evidence • No mention of Frye • Meant to reduce formality • Junk science flourished • Iowa is a Federal Rules of Evidence State

18. Daubert • Rejects the Frye for Federal Courts • Trial judge must serve as gatekeeper to screen unreliable evidence.

19. Kumho • Extended the trail judge’s gate keeping role to all expert testimony • Distinction between scientific and technical or specialized knowledge is not clear. • Expert, whether scientific or not, must “employ in the courtroom the same level of intellectual rigor that characterized the practice of an expert in the relevant field.”

20. So Who is Really Responsible? • The scientific community - Frye • The jury – Federal Rules of Evidence • Trial judge – Daubert, Joiner, Kumho • The appellate courts – Goeb v. Tharaldson

21. Preparation • Provide a resume • Require a pre-trial conference • Dress the part • Prepare visual aids • Practice what you can

22. Juror Research • Through short training lay jurors can improve scientific problem solving ability • Jurors will use past experiences to assess evidence to test which story is most believable • Only if Jurors lose motivation or ability to fit evidence into story will they resort to peripheral cues.

23. Why Jurors Lose Motivation • Too complicated • Not trained by your testimony • Too much detail • Too much jargon

24. Jury Persuasion • Talk to jurors. Give them eye contact • Teach them to evaluate the evidence • Help the jurors understand that the evidence fits the story

25. Some Thoughts About Judges • Black robed, failed scientists? • Learning the job as they go. • Previous difficulty with science and technology • Unbiased?

26. Last Advice • Listen to the question • Pause before answering • Answer the question • If you don’t know, say so

27. Bibliography • Almirall, Jose R., and Kenneth G. Furton • 2001 Forensic Science Explained: A Guide for Understanding the Use of Science in the Administration of Justice. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. • (0-8493-8123-1) • Anonymous • 1993 The Dead Rise Again in the Courtroom. The National Law Journal, June 21, 1993. • Babitsky, S., and J.J. Mangraviti • 1999 How to Excel During Depositions: Techniques for Experts that Work. SEAK Incorporated, Falmouth, MA. • Barnard, Kevin, Nichola Gray, and Earl Hodges • 2002 Expert Evidence. • http://www.benecke.com/evidence.html or http://www.benecke.com/evidence.pdf • Barnett, Peter D. • 2001 Ethics in Forensic Science: Professional Standards for the Practice of Criminalistics. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. • (ISBN: 0-8493-0860-7) • Baute, Paschal • 2002 Expert Witnessing and Daubert: Is Your Expert Witness Prepared for a Daubert/Kumho Challenge? • http://www.acfe.com/public/articles/details.cfm?id=58&get=16 • Becker, Ronald F. • 1997 Scientific Evidence and Expert Testimony Handbook: A Guide for Lawyers, Criminal Investigators, and Forensic Specialists. Charles C. Thomas • Publisher, Springfield, IL. • (ISBN: 0-398-06761-9 or 0-398-06762-7) • Bono, J.P. • 1981 The forensic scientist in the judicial system. Journal of Police Science and Administration, 9(2): 160-166. • Bradley, Michael D. • 1983 The Scientist and Engineer in Court. American Geophysical Union, Washington, D.C. • Brady, William J. • 1982 A Physician/Attorney’s Outline of Death Investigation. (Library of Congress Call Number: RA1063.4.B7 1982) • Brereton, LeGay • 1977 Evidence in Medicine, Science and the Law. Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences, 9:45- • Brodsky, Stanley L. • 1991 Testifying in Court: Guidelines and Maxims for the Expert Witness. American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C. • Bronstein, Daniel A. • 1998 Law for the Expert Witness, Second Edition. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL • (ISBN: 0-8493-8135-5) • Burns, Karen Ramey • 2002 Challenges of the Haitian Courtroom. A paper presented at the 54th Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, Atlanta, • Georgia, February 11-16, 2002. • Canadian Bar Association • 1977 An Index to Expert Witnesses. Prepared for the Seminar on Forensic Science & Circumstantial Proof, Ontario Branch, Canadian Bar Association, • February 3, 1977, Canadian Bar Association, Ontario, Canada. • Cantor, B.J. • 1994 Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence. Federal Judicial Center, Matthew Bender, New York, NY. • 1997 The Role of the Expert Witness in a Court Trial. Civil Evidence, Photo. Seminars, Belmont, MA. • 474 • Cato, B.H. • 1974 The presentation of scientific evidence in the courts - improving its effectiveness. Journal of the Forensic Science Society, 14: 93-97. • Cavanaugh, Janis • 2002 Forensic Evidence in the Courts, Expert Testimony, Lab Assurance and Credibility: An Examination of Employe Certification and Crime Laboratory • Accreditation in Four California Counties. A lecture before the 87th Annual Meeting of the International Association for Identification, Las Vegas, • Nevada, August 6, 2002. • Christensen, Angi M. and Murray K. Marks • 2002 The Impact of Daubert on Testimony and Research in Forensic Anthropology. A paper presented at the 54th Annual Meeting of the American • Academy of Forensic Sciences, Atlanta, Georgia, February 11-16, 2002. • Colquitt, J.A. • 1988 Judicial Use of Social Science Evidence at Trial. Arizona Law Review, 30(1):51-84. • Connors, Edward, Thomas Lundregan, Neal Miller, and Tom McEwen • 1996 Convicted by Juries, Exonerated by Science: Case Studies in the Use of DNA Evidence to Establish Innocence After Trial. United States Department • of Justice, Office of the Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice Research Report, Washington D.C. • Dix, Jay, Elizabeth Laposata, and Joe Moseley • 1994 Attorney’s Handbook of Forensic Pathology and Death Investigation. University of Missouri-Columbia, School of Law, Office of Continuing • Education, Columbia, Missouri. • Doyle, P. • 1989 The Role of the Expert Witness. AFTE Journal, 21(4): 639-642. • Evett, I. • 1996 Expert Evidence and Forensic Misconceptions of the Nature of Exact Science. Sc. Justice, 36(2):118-122. • Faigman, David Laurence • 1999 Legal Alchemy: The Use and Misuse of Science in the Law. W.H. Freeman and Company, New York, NY. • Foster, Kenneth R., and Peter W. Huber • 1997 Judging Science: Scientific Knowledge and the Federal Courts. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. • Frankel, M.S. • 1989 Ethics and Forensic Sciences: Professional Autonomy in the Criminal Justice System. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 34(3):765- • Freckelton, Ian R. • 1987 The Trial of the Expert: A Study of Expert Evidence and Forensic Experts. Oxford University Press, Melbourne. • Freeman, Michael, and Helen Reece • 1998 Science in Court. Dartmouth, Aldershot, Hants, England. • Freiman, M.J., and M.L. Berenblut • 1997 Litigator’s Guide to Expert Witnesses, Canada Law Books, Aurora, Ontario, Canada. • Froede, Richard C. • 1997 The Scientific Expert in Court: Principles and Guidelines. American Association for Clinical Chemistry, Baltimore, MD. • (ISBN: 0-915274-93-0) • Frye vs. United States, 54 App. D.C. 46, 293 F. 1013, 1014 (1923) • Frye vs. United States, 293 F. 1013, 1014, 34 A.L.R. 145 (D.C. Cir. 1923) • Galloway, A., W.H. Birkby, T. Kahana, and L. Fulginiti • 1990 Physical Anthropology and the Law: Legal Responsibilities of Forensic Anthropologists. Yearbook of Physical Anthropology, 33:39-57. • Genck, Wayne J. • 1987 Trial Success Linked to Meeting Expert Witnesses' Expectations. The Expert and the Law: A Publication of the National Forensic Center, 7(2): • Gerber, P. • 1987 Playing Dice with Expert Evidence: The Lessons to Emerge from Regina v. Chamberlain, Med. J. Aust., 147:243-247. • Giannelli, Paul C. • 1989 Evidentiary and Procedural Rules Governing Expert Testimony. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 34(3): 730-748. • 2001 Expert Testimony: Amendments to the Federal Rules of Evidence. A Paper Presented at the American Academy of Forensic Sciences 53rd Annual • Meeting, February 19-24, 2001, Seattle, Washington. • Giannelli, P.C., and E.J. Imwinkelried • 1993 Scientific Evidence, Second Edition, Volumes 1 and 2, Michie Companhy, Charlottesville, VA. • 475 • Gill-King, H. • 1998 Common Scientific Knowledge and the Edges of Expertise. Proceedings of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, San Francisco, CA., p.186. • Good, Phillip I. • 2001 Applying Statistics in the Courtroom: A New Approach for Attorneys and Expert Witnesses. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. • (ISBN: 1-58488-271-9) • Graham Hall, J., and G.D. Smith • 1992 The Expert Witness. Chichester. • Hamlin, Sonya • 1997 What Makes Juries Listen Today. Glasser LegalWorks, Little Falls, NJ. • Havard, J.D.J. • Expert Scientific Evidence Under the Adversarial System A Travesty of Justice? Journal of the Forensic Science Society, 32:225. • Henderson, Carol • 2002 Expert Witnesses: How Experts are Selected. Presentation before the 16th Meeting of the International Association of Forensic Sciences, September 4, • 2002, Montpelier, France. • Henderson, Carol E., Stephen A. Brunette, Roger J. Dodd, Roderick T. Kennedy, Harry L. Miles, and Linda S. Thomas • 1999 How to be a Better Expert Witness. Proceedings of American Academy of Forensic Sciences, V:10-11. • Himberg, Kimmo • 2002 From Crime Scene to Court. "Quality Control in Criminalistics." Presentation before the 16th Meeting of the International Association of Forensic • Sciences, September 4, 2002, Montpelier, France. • Hodgkinson, T. • 1988 Expert Evidence and Reasonable Doubt. Law Quarterly Review, 104(4): 198-202. • Hollien, H. • 1990 The Expert Witness: Ethics and Responsibilities. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 35(6): 1414-1423. • Hoshower, Lisa M. • 1999 Expert Witness Testimony and the Forensic Anthropologist. Proceedings of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, V:220-221. • Howard, L.B. • 1986 The Dichotomy of the Expert Witness. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 31(1):338- • Huber, Peter William • 1991 Galileo’s Revenge: Junk Science in the Courtroom. BasicBooks, New York, NY. • Huber, Roy A. • 1959-60 Expert Witnesses. Criminal Law Quarterly, 2(280) • Hyzer, William G. • 1998 The Use and Misuse of Images as Evidentiary Information in the Courtroom. Proceedings of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, IV:84. • Imwinkelried, E.J. • 1992 The Methods of Attacking Scientific Evidence. The Michie Company, Charlottesville, VA. • Jaffe, Mark E. • 2002 The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly: Legal Perspectives of What Makes a Good Expert Witness. A paper presented at the 54th Annual Meeting of the • American Academy of Forensic Sciences, Atlanta, Georgia, February 11-16, 2002. • Jones, Carol A.G. • 1994 Expert Witnesses: Science, Medicine, and the Practice of Law. Clarendon Press, Oxford, England. or Oxford University Press, New York. • Kantor, A. Tana • 1998 Winning Your Case with Graphics. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. • (ISBN: 0-8493-8131-2) • Kaye, David H. • 1997 Science in Evidence. Anderson Publishing, Cincinnati, OH. • Kennedy, Kenneth A.R. • 1998 Trials in Court: The Forensic Anthropologist Takes the Stand. Proceedings of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, San Francisco, CA., • p.186. • 2002 Tirals in Court: The Forensic Anthropologist Takes the Stand. In D.W. Steadman, editor, Hard Evidence: Case Studies in Forensic Anthropology, • Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ • 476 • Kiely, Terrence F. • 2001 Forensic Eviden ce: Science and the Criminal Law. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. • (ISBN: 0-8493-1896-3) • Klawans, Harold L. • 1991 Trials of an Expert Witness: Tales of Clinical Neurology and the Law. Little, Brown, Boston, MA. • Knight, B. • 1989 Ethics and Discipline in Forensic Science. Journal of the Forensic Science Society, 29(1): 53-60. • Koehler, J.J. • 1993 Error and Exaggreration in the presentation of DNA Evidence. Jurimetrics, 34:21-39. • Kogan, J.D. • 1978 On Being and Expert Witness in a Criminal Trial. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 23(1): 190-200. • Kreeger, Lisa • 2002 Preparing for Defense Experts. Silent Witness, 7(2): • Lawton, Lord Justice • 1980 The Limitations of Expert Scientific Evidence. Journal of the Forensic Science Society, 20: 237-242. • Lilly, Graham C. • 1987 An Introduction to the Law of Evidence, Second Edition. West Publishing Company, • Lloyd, R.H. • 1990 Homicide Reconstruction with the Use of Scale Model for Courtroom Presentation. Extended Abstract. Proceedings of the International Symposium • on the Forensic Aspects of Mass Disasters and Crime Scene Reconstruction, June 23-29,1990, Forensic Science Research and Training Center, FBI • Academy, Quantico, Virginia. sponsored by the Laboratory and Identification Divisions, Federal Bureau of Investigation, United States Government • Printing Office, Washington, D.C. pp 277. • 'Lucas, D.M. • 1989 The Ethical Responsibilities of the Forensic Scientist: Exploring the Limits. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 34(3):721-. • Mac Donald, Elizabeth • 1999 The Making of an Expert Witness: It's in the Credentials. Wall Street Journal, February 8, 1999. • MacHovec, Frank J. • 1987 The Expert Witness Survival Manual. Charles C. Thomas Publisher, Springfield, IL. • (ISBN: 0-398-05374-X or 0-398-06256-0) • Maney, J. Randolph , Jr., and Ruth E. Lucas • 1998 Courtroom Evidence. Office of Legal Education, Executive Office for United States Attorney, Washington, D.C. • Matson, Jack V. • 1990 Effective Expert Witnessing. Lewis Publishers, Chelsea, MI. • 1994 Effective Expert Witnessing, Second Edition. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. • (ISBN: 1-56670-002-7) • 1999 Effective Expert Witnessing, Third Edition. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. • (ISBN: 1-56670-340-9) • Mc Donald, Peter V. • 1987 More Court Jesters. Stoddard Publishing Company, Toronto. • Meyer, Carl B. (editor) • 1998 Expert Witnesses: Explaining and Understanding Science. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. • (ISBN: 0-8493-1197-7) • Mildred, R.H. • 1982 The Expert Witness. London. • Mirfield, Peter • 1997 Silence, Confessions and Improperly Obtained Evidence. Clarendon Press, Oxford, England, or Oxford University Press, New York, NY. • Moenssens, Andre A., Fred E. Inbau, and James E. Starrs • 1986 Scientific Evidence in Criminal Cases. Foundation Press, Mineola, NY. • Moenssens, Andre, James Starrs, Carole Henderson, and Fred Inbau • 1995 Scientific Evidence in Civil and Criminal Cases. Foundation Press, Mineola, NY. • 477 • Neufield, P.J. and N. Colman • 1990 When Science Takes the Witness Stand. Scientific American, 262(5): 18-25. • Nijboer, J.F., C.R. Callen, and N. Kwak (editors) • 1993 Forensic Expertise and the Law of Evidence. North-Holland, New York, NY. • Nordby, Jon J. • 2002 Review of: Ethics in Forensic Science: Professional Standards for the Practice of Criminalistics [A Volume in the Protocols in Forensic Science • Series]. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 47(5):1184-1185. • Northrup, Andrew T., and Brendan P. Max • 2003 Disclosing Information: Ethics for the Forensic Scientist. A paper presneted at the 55th Annnual Meeting of the American Academy of Forensic • Sciences, Chicago, Illinois, February 21, 2003. • O’Brien, M.W. • 1989 Scale Model in Criminal Trials. Journal of Forensic Identification, 39(6): 359-366. • Odgers, S.J., and J.T. Richardson • 1995 Keeping Bad Science Out of the Courtroom: Changes in American and Australian Expert Evidence Law. University of New South Wales Law • Review, 18:108-129. • Pendleton, Herbert F. • 2002 Higher Education and Ethics in Law Enforcement. A lecture before the 87th Annual Meeting of the International Association for Identification, Las • Vegas, Nevada, August 5, 2002. • Peterson, J.L. • 1988 Teaching Ethics in a Forensic Science Curriculum. Journal of Forensic Science, 33(4): 1082. • Peterson, J.L., and J.E. Murdock • 1989 Forensic Science Ethics: Developing an Integrated System of Support and Enforcement. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 34(3): 749-762. • Porter, Chester • 1995 The Evidence of Experts. Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences, 27:53- • Poynter, Dan • 1987 The Expert Witness Handbook: Tips and Techniques for the Litigation Consultant. Para Publishing, Santa Barbara, CA. • Rathbun, Ted A. and Jane E. Buikstra (editors) • 1984 Presenting Evidence. In Human Identification, Charles C. Thomas Publisher, Springfield, IL. • Redmond, Theresa • 2002 Courtroom or Classroom? Demonstrative Evidence . . . A lecture before the 87th Annual Meeting of the International Association of Identification, • Las Vegas, Nevada, August 6, 2002. • Robertson, Bernard, and G.A. Vignaux • 1995 Interpreting Evidence: Evaluating Forensic Science in the Courtroom. John Wiley, New York, NY. • Rosen, L. • 1977 The Anthropologist as Expert Witness. American Anthropologist, 79:555-578. • Rosner, R. • 1996 Ethical Practice in the Forensic Sciences and Justification of Ehtical Codes. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 41:913- • Saks, M.J. • 1989 Prevalence and Impact of Ethical Problems in Forensic Science. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 34(3): 772-793. • Sales, Bruce Dennis (editor) • 1981 The Trial Process. Plenum Press, New York, NY. • Saul, Julie Mather Saul • 1998 “This is What Happened to Me”: Allowing the Dead to Speak for Themselves in Court. Proceedings of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, • San Francisco, CA., pp. 184. • Saviers, Kathleen D. • 2002 Ethics in Forensic Science: A Review of the Literature on Expert Testimony. Journal of Forensic Identification, 52(4):449-462. • Smith, Derek A. • 1993 Being an Effective Expert Witness: The Technologist in the Courtroom. Thames, London, England. • Smith, James S. • 2003 Introduction: The Importance of Ethics. A paper presneted at the 55th Annnual Meeting of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, Chicago, • Illinois, February 20, 2003. • 478 • Smith, Ron • 2002 Courtroom Testimony Techniques: Success Instead of Survival. A lecture before the 87th Annual Meeting of the International Association for • Identification, Las Vegas, Nevada, August 8, 2002. • Spurgeon Hall, Richard A., Carolyn Brown Dennis, and Tere L. Chipman • 1999 The Ethical Foundations of Criminal Justice, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. • (ISBN: 0849391164) • Starrs, J.E. • 1985 In the Land of Agog: An Allegory for the Expert Witness. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 30(2):297- • Starrs, James E., and Charles R. Midkiff, editors • 1998 Beware Experts, You May be Next. Scientific Sleuthing Review, The Many Uses of the Forensic Sciences, 22(4): • Stern, Paul • 1999 Surviving in the Courtroom, Twelve Rules of Testifying as an Expert Witness. A Presentation before the Masters 8Conference for Advanced Death • Investigation, presented by Division of Forensic Pathology, St. Louis University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, July 26-29, 1999. • Sunar, D.G. • 1989 The Expert Witness Handbook: A Guide for Engineers. Professional Publications, Belmont, CA. • Sundick, Robert • 1984 Ashes to Ashes, Dust to Dust or Where did the Skeleton Go? In Human Identification, Ted A. Rathbun and Jane E. Buikstra editors, Charles C. • Thomas Publisher, Springfield, IL. pp. 412-423. • 1998 The Use and Misuse of Forensic Experts in the Courtroom. Proceedings of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, San Francisco, CA., p.186. • Surosky, Alan E. • 1993 The Expert Witness Guide for Scientists and Engineers. Krieger Publishing Company, Malabar, FL. • Taroni, F., and CGG Aitken • 1997 Forensic Science at Trial. Jurimetrics, 37:327-337. • Tunno, David • n.d. Taking the Stand: Tips for the Expert. Lawyers and Judges Publishing Company, Tucson, Arizona. • Williams, C.R. • 1994 Evidence and the Expert Witness. Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences, 26:3- • Zuckerman, A.A.S. • 1989 The Principles of Criminal Evidence. Clarendon Press, Oxford, England, or Oxford University Press, New York, NY.