What is the advantage of having an expert testify on behalf of the plaintiff?

A
controversial topic in forensic psychology is in reference to the memory
system and whether a memory is “lost” due to abuse and whether it can
return at a later time and place. There is controversial evidence on the
buried memory system and whether its recovery is accurate or false;
intentional or non-intentional. The article Focus 11.1 Recovered Memory
in Court: Two Cases (in your textbook within the chapter)
presents several thoughtful questions to think about as you read through
the two cases as well as outside sources. Read through the module, the
two cases presented in the article and any relevant outside sources
which state further information to this topic of recovered memories to
respond to the following 3 questions.

Read
each question before responding to them to be able to relate to the
scenarios from the article. Each question should have a minimum word
count of 300 for each question, do not count the question towards your
response. Copy and paste the question and then create your response, be
sure to keen your responses numbered. Be thorough with each question and
include factual connections from the text, cases, outside sources and
your prior topical knowledge to complete your responses. Create your
response in a word document and include APA reference citations at the
end of your response.

1.
It is not unusual for recovered memory cases to involve hypnosis, as it
did in the Borawick case. Given that the court did not allow
hypnotically refreshed testimony in that case, why did it not ban such
testimony across the board in all cases? Illustrate with any case
example.

2.
Some courts have allowed expert testimony on repressed and recovered
memory. Other courts do not allow expert, but the plaintiff in a civil
suit can still essentially say, “I forgot, but now I remember.” What is
the advantage of having an expert testify on behalf of the plaintiff?
Discuss if there are there any disadvantages and explain.

3.
John Doe’s case was a civil case. Would prosecutors have been allowed
to bring criminal charges against the priest? Explain why and then
select and explain any other high-profile case involving priests that
were in similar situations with regards to charges and memory.

Last Completed Projects