NCJ Number
15830
Journal
St Louis University Law Journal Volume: 18 Issue: 2 Dated: (WNTER 1973) Pages: 235-255
Date Published
1973
Length
21 pages
Annotation
THE CRITERIA DEVELOPED BY THE COURTS IN DECIDING THE ADMISSIBILITY OF OTHER SCIENTIFIC TESTS ARE REVIEWED AND DISCUSSED AS A BASIS FOR DETERMINING THE STATUS OF NEUTRON ACTIVATION ANALYSIS (NAA) DATA.
Abstract
ANALYSIS OF THE TESTS THAT HAVE BEEN HELD INADMISSIBLE IN COURT (POLYGRAPH, TRUTH SERUM, HYPNOSIS) LISTS INACCURACY, UNRELIABILITY AND LACK OF OBJECTIVE INTERPRETATION BY QUALIFIED EXPERTS AS THE REASONS FOR NON-ACCAPTANCE. TESTS GENERALLY HELD ADMISSIBLE FINGERPRINTS, X-RAYS, BLOOD TESTS, AND RADAR - CONFORM TO TWO TYPES OF CRITERIA - QUALIFICATION OF THE TEST OR PROCESS AND QUALIFICATION OF THE EXPERTS WHO HAVE PERFORMED THE TEST OR INTERPRETED THE RESULTS. AN EXPLANATION OF THE NAA PROCESS, ITS ADVANTAGES AND LIMITATIONS DESCRIBES THE QUALIFICATION OF THE TEST AND POINTS THE FACT THAT THE INTERPRETATION AND INTRODUCTION OF TEST DATA CAN NOT BE DONE BY ANYONE BUT A QUALIFIED EXPERT WITNESS. IT IS MAINTAINED THAT THE ONLY MAJOR CONSIDERATION IN DETERMINING THE ADMISSIBILITY OF NAA DATA IS THE LEGAL RELEVANCY OF THE PROBABILITY EVIDENCE WHEN CONSIDERED IN RELATION TO OTHER EVIDENCE IN THE CASE.