Court ruling on 'junk science' gives judges more say about what expert witness testimony to allow.
作者信息
Marwick C
出版信息
JAMA. 1993 Jul 28;270(4):423.
PMID:8320770
Abstract
摘要
相似文献
1
2
Admissibility of scientific testimony into evidence.科学证言作为证据的可采性。
Am J Hosp Pharm. 1994 Mar 1;51(5):683-5.
3
Bendectin case dismissed.“曲美苄胺案”撤诉。
Science. 1995 Jan 13;267(5195):167. doi: 10.1126/science.7809619.
4
Daubert v Merrell Dow. The Supreme Court tackles scientific evidence in the courtroom.多伯特诉美锐尔·道公司案。美国最高法院着手处理法庭上的科学证据问题。
JAMA. 1993;270(24):2964-7. doi: 10.1001/jama.270.24.2964.
5
Supreme Court to judges: start thinking like scientists.最高法院对法官们表示：要开始像科学家一样思考。
Science. 1993 Jul 2;261(5117):22. doi: 10.1126/science.8316850.
6
Supreme Court to weigh science.最高法院将权衡科学依据。
Science. 1993 Jan 29;259(5095):588-90. doi: 10.1126/science.8338515.
7
Evaluating the admissibility of expert testimony.评估专家证词的可采性。
Hosp Community Psychiatry. 1994 Jan;45(1):9-10. doi: 10.1176/ps.45.1.9.
8
Debendox in the dock.复方晕海宁（乘晕宁）被送上了法庭。
Nurs Mirror. 1980 Feb 21;150(8):8-9.
9
Daubert v. Merrell Dow: missed opportunity.多伯特诉美锐尔大药厂案：错失的机遇。
Food Drug Law J. 1995;50(1):71-93.
10
Science, law, and the search for truth in the courtroom: lessons from Daubert v. Merrell Dow.科学、法律与法庭上对真相的探寻：从多伯特诉美锐尔·陶氏案中汲取的教训
J Law Med Ethics. 1994 Spring;22(1):6-20. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-720x.1994.tb01270.x.
引用本文的文献
1
Constructing "sound science" and "good epidemiology": tobacco, lawyers, and public relations firms.构建“可靠科学”与“良好流行病学”：烟草、律师与公关公司
Am J Public Health. 2001 Nov;91(11):1749-57. doi: 10.2105/ajph.91.11.1749.
Zotero 插件