2020
DOI: 10.1017/9781911623670
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Rix's Expert Psychiatric Evidence

Abstract: Rix's Expert Psychiatric Evidence is a resource manual and guide for psychiatrists who provide expert testimony. It covers the entire expert psychiatric witness journey, from training and negotiation of instructions, through medicolegal assessment, report preparation, experts' meetings and joint statements, and conferences with counsel, to giving evidence in court along with advice on keeping up to date. Introductory chapters include essential information on the law of expert evidence and the different procedu… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Second, this paper contributes to expert witness education in reminding the expert witness that their clinical assessments seek to answer critical legal questions which have direct bearing on justice and the culpability or otherwise of patient-defendants (48,68). In so doing, the psychiatrist is reminded that the ultimate issue is one for the court to decide (Evidence Act, 2011; (12,47)) but great direction may be obtained from well-framed expert opinions based on the available evidence which may sometimes be unreliable in the eyes of the court.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Second, this paper contributes to expert witness education in reminding the expert witness that their clinical assessments seek to answer critical legal questions which have direct bearing on justice and the culpability or otherwise of patient-defendants (48,68). In so doing, the psychiatrist is reminded that the ultimate issue is one for the court to decide (Evidence Act, 2011; (12,47)) but great direction may be obtained from well-framed expert opinions based on the available evidence which may sometimes be unreliable in the eyes of the court.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Third, this review could potentially educate judicial actors in Nigeria on the need to rely appropriately on the assistance of credible expert witnesses in making non-dispositive determination of the existence of mental disorder in defendants within the overall context of the adjudication of insanity cases (2,43,69). Expert witnesses have a more crucial role to play in cases where the defendant only has subjective claims of mental illness as the court would benefit significantly from honest, neutral and relatively objective opinion evidence as is ethically required of experts (64,(69)(70)(71). Fourth, the disposal of insanity cases has implication for the practice of forensic mental health both within the secure forensic care context and prison mental health care in terms of the assessment and treatment of those adjudged as mentally disordered offenders.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are no specific procedural rules governing expert witnesses in Parole Board hearings in England and Wales as there are for criminal courts. Rix et al (2020) provide detailed guidance for witnesses to criminal courts, including procedural rules that govern admissibility of evidence and BOX 3 Professional witnesses to the Parole Board for England and Wales…”
Section: Psychiatrist As Expert Witnessmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…duties of an expert witness. We consider that the standards and rules governing expert evidence to criminal courts (Rix 2020) apply equally to evidence to parole hearings, although they are not laid down in statutory instruments.…”
Section: Psychiatrist As Expert Witnessmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This issue was prominent in a case that was decided eventually by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, Pora v The Queen [2015]. A forensic psychologist's evidence was ruled inadmissible on the basis that, in trenchantly asserting that the appellant's confessions were unreliable, he was supplanting the court's role as the ultimate decision maker on a matter that was central to the outcome of the case (Rix 2020).…”
Section: Issues Of Competence and Reliabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%