class activity: Judging Admissibility

In this module, you learned about the requirements for admissibility of scientific evidence. In the United States, judges have the responsibility of identifying whether or not scientific evidence is admissible and can be presented during the trial. To help them decide, judges use the precedents from four cases relating to admissibility: Frye v United States (1923); Daubert v Merrel Dow Pharmaceuticals (1993); General Electric Co v Joiner (1997); Kumho Tire Co v Carmichael (1999).
Activity For this activity, you will take the role of a judge in a hypothetical case. You have been given two case summaries. Each case involves a requested expert witness testimony. For each case, you have been asked to rule whether or not the testimony is admissible. You will apply two different precedents to each case to determine admissibility, the Fryestandard and the Daubert trilogy standard.
Download the worksheet below and complete. The worksheet contains a witness biography and a summary of each piece of scientific evidence being presented. For each witness, apply the Frye standard and the Daubert trilogy standard to determine whether or not the expert testimony can be admitted. Identify on the worksheet whether or not you would admit the testimony or exclude the testimony. Explain your choice in the space provided. Once you have filled out the whole worksheet, submit it as a word document using this link.

Last Completed Projects