Gary Edmond
Biographic Data
| ID | 628301 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Gary Edmond |
| GIVEN NAMES | Gary |
| FAMILY NAME | Edmond |
| SIGNATURE | EDMOND G |
| AFFILIATIONS | UNSW Sydney |
| ORCID | 0000-0003-2609-7499 |
| VERIFIED | Yes |
| TOTAL WORKS | 32 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 66 |
| AUTHOR COUNT | 32 |
| EDITOR COUNT | 0 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 1996 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2025 |
| H-INDEX | 5 |
Folbigg against the queen (of proof): ‘Confessions’ From the Supreme Court
Trial by Cognitive Ordeal: Irrational Approaches to the Opinions of Investigators, Trial Integrity and Proof
This article suggests that lawyers and judges may not understand the effects of their rules and procedures upon the production of evidence and its evaluation in criminal trials and appeals. Focusing on case studies involving the opinions of police officers and other investigators, as well as experts, it explains how applicable rules, procedures and safeguards did not produce, and appear incapable of producing, the effects claimed by courts. Drawi…
Lay comprehension of statistical evidence: A novel measurement approach
Fingerprint Comparison and Adversarialism: The Scientific and Historical Evidence
This article suggests that lawyers and courts are largely oblivious to scientific insights regarding the value and limitations of latent fingerprint evidence. It proceeds through a detailed historical analysis of the way fingerprint evidence has been reported and challenged. It compares legal responses with mainstream scientific research. Our analysis shows that fingerprint evidence is routinely equated with categorical proof of identity notwiths…
Forensic science and the myth of adversarial testing
This article explains why the adversarial trial has not been an effective mechanism for regulating the admission and use of many forms of forensic science evidence. Drawing upon mainstream scientific perspectives, and using an historical study of reported decisions involving latent fingerprint evidence, it documents how lawyers and judges never required forensic scientists to formally evaluate their procedures or express opinions in ways that are…
Just Cognition: Scientific Research on Bias and Some Implications for Legal Procedure and Decision‐Making
Common law judges have traditionally been concerned about bias and the appearance of bias. Bias is believed to threaten the administration of justice and the legitimacy of legal decision‐making, particularly public confidence in the courts. This article contrasts legal approaches to bias with a range of biases, particularly cognitive biases, familiar to scientists who study human cognition and decision‐making. Research reveals that judges have na…
Expert Reports and the Forensic Sciences
All Australian jurisdictions regulate the admission of expert opinion evidence. The rules focus on ‘specialised knowledge’, the existence of a ‘field’, and ‘training, study or experience’.[footnote* In most Australian jurisdictions the admission of expert opinion evidence is governed by s 79 of the Uniform Evidence Law (‘UEL’): see Evidence Act 1995 (Cth); Evidence Act 2011 (ACT); Evidence Act 1995 (NSW); Evidence Act 2001 (Tas); Evidence Act 200…
Judicial notice: Beyond adversarialism and into the exogenous zone
Recent Australian decisions regarding courts’ unilateral access to exogenous (ie non-legal) knowledge have been restrictive, reflecting a strong commitment to the adversarialist principle of party presentation. With reference to underlying goals of factual accuracy, efficient dispute resolution, fairness and institutional integrity we argue that the restrictions should be loosened. The strict principle of party presentation, with only narrow scop…
A little ignorance is a dangerous thing: Engaging with exogenous knowledge not adduced by the parties
Using a recent trial and appeal in Canada as an example, this essay reviews our conventional reticence to allowing judges to draw the attention of counsel to issues that might influence the assessment of forensic science evidence in criminal proceedings. We question the institutional commitment to judicial non-intervention and suggest that on many occasions judicial passivity or quiescence (rather than impartiality) threatens the fundamental goal…
Legal versus non-legal approaches to forensic science evidence
In their attempts to determine the admissibility and probative value of forensic science and medicine evidence, common law courts have tended to focus on considerations such as: the formal qualifications and training of the analyst, the analyst’s experience doing the same or similar things, the existence of a field, whether the evidence might assist the jury, apparent partisanship and plausibility, the overall strength of the case and even the pe…
Justicia’s Gaze: Surveillance, Evidence and the Criminal Trial
This paper considers the use of the products of surveillance, primarily images, as evidence within the criminal trial. These products, whether static images, video or voice recordings, are increasingly being mediated for the fact-finder via ‘experts’, proffering an opinion about the meaning of some surveillance image, artefact or trace. Common law courts, including those in Australia, the UK, Canada, and the US, have been surprisingly accommodati…
The Cool Crucible: Forensic Science and the Frailty of the Criminal Trial
Recent developments overseas and in Australia have thrown into question the assumption that the incriminating expert opinion evidence (ie forensic science and forensic medicine) relied on, routinely, in criminal trials is epistemologically robust. At the same time, scepticism about the efficacy of traditional safeguards has been rendered more acute when considering the capacity of the criminal trial to effectively manage incriminating expert evid…
Just truth? Carefully applying history, philosophy and sociology of science to the forensic use of CCTV images
Advice for the Courts? Sufficiently Reliable Assistance with Forensic Science and Medicine (Part 2)
In recent years, following public inquiries (for example, the Goudge Inquiry, 2007–08), reviews (for example, the US National Academy of Science, 2009; the Law Commission of England and Wales, 2011), systematic analysis of wrongful convictions (for example, Innocence Projects) and empirical studies, weaknesses with many types of forensic science and the frailty of the adversarial criminal trial have been exposed, though inadequately addressed. Dr…
Is Reliability Sufficient? The Law Commission and Expert Evidence in International and Interdisciplinary Perspective (Part 1)
This article offers a critical appraisal of the Law Commission's Report, Expert Evidence in Criminal Proceedings in England and Wales (2011), and related proposals for reform. Drawing upon interdisciplinary research and empirical studies from other common law jurisdictions it suggests that the introduction of a reliability-based admissibility standard for expert opinion evidence, even in conjunction with provision for recourse to court-appointed …
A Contextual Approach to the Admissibility of the State's Forensic Science and Medical Evidence
This article examines the admissibility of forensic science and medicine in criminal proceedings. In Part ii, we explain how reliability-based admissibility standards in the United States have been unevenly applied to expert evidence in civil and criminal cases and have not prevented wrongful convictions. In Part iii, we review a recent Consultation Paper (and report) issued by the Law Commission of England and Wales. Though focused on the need f…
Atkins v The Emperor: The ‘Cautious’ Use of Unreliable ‘Expert’ Opinion
Keywords Expert evidence, CCTV, Facial mapping, Admissibility, Reliability, Identification, Photograph
Law's Looking Glass: Expert Identification Evidence Derived from Photographic and Video Images
This article offers a critical overview of expert identification evidence based on images. It reviews the Australian case law and then, in an interdisciplinary manner, endeavours to explain methodological, technical and theoretical problems with facial mapping evidence. It suggests that extant admissibility jurisprudence and traditional safeguards associated with expert opinion evidence and the adversarial trial might not adequately protect those…
Anti-social Epistemologies
The recent First Amendment litigation in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005) raises many issues of interest to social science and humanities scholars. This paper will focus on just two: the scope afforded to Steve Fuller to present his STS perspectives; and the way the Court appears to have put this expertise to work. The Court’s formal receptiveness to Fuller’s testimony reflects the symbolic significance of science–religion encounte…
Thick Decisions: Expertise, Advocacy and Reasonableness in the Federal Court of Australia
Drawing from the litigation around the Hindmarsh Island Bridge (especially Chapman v Luminis Pty Ltd 2001) this article provides an analysis of judicial responses to anthropological expertise. Sensitive to the institutional responsibilities of judges, as well as rules of evidence, procedures and legal causes of action, it examines the strategic representation and appropriation of anthropological knowledge and practice. In exploring the relations …
Law and the uncooked – a reply
Daubert and the Exclusionary Ethos: The Convergence of Corporate and Judicial Attitudes towards the Admissibility of Expert Evidence in Tort Litigation
The article traces the way admissibility jurisprudence following Daubert has come to emphasize the importance of strict judicial gatekeeping; making it more difficult for plaintiffs to succeed in tort and product liability litigation. This exclusionary ethos appears to have been shaped by a range of values and interests which appear closely aligned to the perspectives promoted by corporate‐sponsored proponents of tort and evidence reform. The eff…
Legal Engineering: Contested Representations of Law, Science (and Non-science) and Society
Recently, in the case of Kumho Tire Co v. Carmichael, the US Supreme Court revisited the seminal Daubert judgment, and the meaning of the Federal Rules of Evidence (1975) when considering the appropriate admissibility standard for non-scientific expert evidence in US federal courts. This article examines the Kumho decision in relation to the evolving US federal jurisprudence surrounding the admission and use of expert evidence. In particular, int…
The Law-Set: The Legal-Scientific Production of Medical Propriety
This article examines some of the interactions between law, science, and society taking place during a trial (in Victorian England). By focusing on a restricted set of scientific and nonscientific actors (the law-set, a derivation of the core-set) engaged in negotiating the meaning, relevance, and reliability of scientific (here medical) evidence, the article illustrates how the categories-law, science, and society-are inextricably interrelated i…
Litigation Life: Law-Science Knowledge Construction in (Bendectin) Mass Toxic Tort Litigation
In recent decades, large-scale product liability litigation, so-called `mass torts', have become increasingly visible on the US legal and political landscape. Invariably, mass tort litigation incorporates a range of specialist scientific knowledges. Drawing upon fairly conventional images of law and science, most judges and legal commentators attribute the apparent difficulties encountered in addressing the refractory issues involved with scienti…
Legal Engineering: Contested Representations of Law, Science (and Non-science) and Society
Recently, in the case of Kumho Tire Co v. Carmichael, the US Supreme Court revisited the seminal Daubert judgment, and the meaning of the Federal Rules of Evidence (1975) when considering the appropriate admissibility standard for non-scientific expert evidence in US federal courts. This article examines the Kumho decision in relation to the evolving US federal jurisprudence surrounding the admission and use of expert evidence. In particular, int…
Daubert and the Exclusionary Ethos: The Convergence of Corporate and Judicial Attitudes towards the Admissibility of Expert Evidence in Tort Litigation
The article traces the way admissibility jurisprudence following Daubert has come to emphasize the importance of strict judicial gatekeeping; making it more difficult for plaintiffs to succeed in tort and product liability litigation. This exclusionary ethos appears to have been shaped by a range of values and interests which appear closely aligned to the perspectives promoted by corporate‐sponsored proponents of tort and evidence reform. The eff…
Litigation Life: Law-Science Knowledge Construction in (Bendectin) Mass Toxic Tort Litigation
In recent decades, large-scale product liability litigation, so-called `mass torts', have become increasingly visible on the US legal and political landscape. Invariably, mass tort litigation incorporates a range of specialist scientific knowledges. Drawing upon fairly conventional images of law and science, most judges and legal commentators attribute the apparent difficulties encountered in addressing the refractory issues involved with scienti…
The Law-Set: The Legal-Scientific Production of Medical Propriety
This article examines some of the interactions between law, science, and society taking place during a trial (in Victorian England). By focusing on a restricted set of scientific and nonscientific actors (the law-set, a derivation of the core-set) engaged in negotiating the meaning, relevance, and reliability of scientific (here medical) evidence, the article illustrates how the categories-law, science, and society-are inextricably interrelated i…
Anti-social Epistemologies
The recent First Amendment litigation in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005) raises many issues of interest to social science and humanities scholars. This paper will focus on just two: the scope afforded to Steve Fuller to present his STS perspectives; and the way the Court appears to have put this expertise to work. The Court’s formal receptiveness to Fuller’s testimony reflects the symbolic significance of science–religion encounte…
Judicial Representations of Scientific Evidence
A critical examination of the way that courts handle scientific expert evidence reveals inconsistency in strategies for validating and legitimating the weight attached to it. This inconsistency is rooted in perceptions of the nature of scientific knowledge. The essay considers the implications of this analysis for the Woolf reforms of civil procedure with respect to expert evidence
Is Reliability Sufficient? The Law Commission and Expert Evidence in International and Interdisciplinary Perspective (Part 1)
This article offers a critical appraisal of the Law Commission's Report, Expert Evidence in Criminal Proceedings in England and Wales (2011), and related proposals for reform. Drawing upon interdisciplinary research and empirical studies from other common law jurisdictions it suggests that the introduction of a reliability-based admissibility standard for expert opinion evidence, even in conjunction with provision for recourse to court-appointed …
Atkins v The Emperor: The ‘Cautious’ Use of Unreliable ‘Expert’ Opinion
Keywords Expert evidence, CCTV, Facial mapping, Admissibility, Reliability, Identification, Photograph
Justicia’s Gaze: Surveillance, Evidence and the Criminal Trial
This paper considers the use of the products of surveillance, primarily images, as evidence within the criminal trial. These products, whether static images, video or voice recordings, are increasingly being mediated for the fact-finder via ‘experts’, proffering an opinion about the meaning of some surveillance image, artefact or trace. Common law courts, including those in Australia, the UK, Canada, and the US, have been surprisingly accommodati…
Advice for the Courts? Sufficiently Reliable Assistance with Forensic Science and Medicine (Part 2)
In recent years, following public inquiries (for example, the Goudge Inquiry, 2007–08), reviews (for example, the US National Academy of Science, 2009; the Law Commission of England and Wales, 2011), systematic analysis of wrongful convictions (for example, Innocence Projects) and empirical studies, weaknesses with many types of forensic science and the frailty of the adversarial criminal trial have been exposed, though inadequately addressed. Dr…
A Contextual Approach to the Admissibility of the State's Forensic Science and Medical Evidence
This article examines the admissibility of forensic science and medicine in criminal proceedings. In Part ii, we explain how reliability-based admissibility standards in the United States have been unevenly applied to expert evidence in civil and criminal cases and have not prevented wrongful convictions. In Part iii, we review a recent Consultation Paper (and report) issued by the Law Commission of England and Wales. Though focused on the need f…
Representing the Sociology of Scientific Knowledge and Law
The sociology of scientific knowledge (SSK) has become widely cited in policy contexts including discussion of law, science, and society. The following article provides a textual examination of how some of the work of eminent SSK and law scholar Sheila Jasanoff has been received in U.S. legal scholarship. Focusing on debate sparked by the 1993 Supreme Court case of Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the authors argue that textual evide…
Survey review
Scientific literacy and the jury: Reconsidering jury `competence'
This article explores contemporary debates about the competence of juries to assess scientific and technical evidence. Most existing approaches measure jury competence against an unproblematized yardstick of `the correct scientific understanding'. We will develop an alternative, more sociologically and epistemologically nuanced view of the jury comprehension of science which significantly reframes these issues for both proponents and opponents of…
Down by Science: Context and commitment in the lay response to incriminating scientific evidence during a murder trial
This paper explores responses to scientific evidence from a lay person accused of murder. These responses are examined with reference to the specific (here legal) contexts in which they were offered. This paper will provide some analysis of the motivations or goals behind some particular lay understandings of scientific evidence, and the function which representations of these understandings were designed to fulfill as the accused attempted to pr…
The Next Step or Moonwalking? Expert Evidence, the Public Understanding of Science and the Case against Imwinkelried's Didactic Trial Procedures
Representing the Sociology of Scientific Knowledge and Law
The sociology of scientific knowledge (SSK) has become widely cited in policy contexts including discussion of law, science, and society. The following article provides a textual examination of how some of the work of eminent SSK and law scholar Sheila Jasanoff has been received in U.S. legal scholarship. Focusing on debate sparked by the 1993 Supreme Court case of Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the authors argue that textual evide…
Creating (public) science in the Noah's Ark case
This paper explores how a recent “Creation Science” case from the Australian Federal Courts was used by an informal alliance of science popularizers (science litigant Ian Plimer, science journalists, and the Australian Skeptics) as a vehicle for the celebratory “boundary working” of “public science,” despite the case's contingent and messy processes and unfavourable legal outcome. This “boundary working” was pursued mainly through the mass media,…
Litigation Life: Law-Science Knowledge Construction in (Bendectin) Mass Toxic Tort Litigation
In recent decades, large-scale product liability litigation, so-called `mass torts', have become increasingly visible on the US legal and political landscape. Invariably, mass tort litigation incorporates a range of specialist scientific knowledges. Drawing upon fairly conventional images of law and science, most judges and legal commentators attribute the apparent difficulties encountered in addressing the refractory issues involved with scienti…
Judicial Representations of Scientific Evidence
A critical examination of the way that courts handle scientific expert evidence reveals inconsistency in strategies for validating and legitimating the weight attached to it. This inconsistency is rooted in perceptions of the nature of scientific knowledge. The essay considers the implications of this analysis for the Woolf reforms of civil procedure with respect to expert evidence
The Law-Set: The Legal-Scientific Production of Medical Propriety
This article examines some of the interactions between law, science, and society taking place during a trial (in Victorian England). By focusing on a restricted set of scientific and nonscientific actors (the law-set, a derivation of the core-set) engaged in negotiating the meaning, relevance, and reliability of scientific (here medical) evidence, the article illustrates how the categories-law, science, and society-are inextricably interrelated i…
Legal Engineering: Contested Representations of Law, Science (and Non-science) and Society
Recently, in the case of Kumho Tire Co v. Carmichael, the US Supreme Court revisited the seminal Daubert judgment, and the meaning of the Federal Rules of Evidence (1975) when considering the appropriate admissibility standard for non-scientific expert evidence in US federal courts. This article examines the Kumho decision in relation to the evolving US federal jurisprudence surrounding the admission and use of expert evidence. In particular, int…
Thick Decisions: Expertise, Advocacy and Reasonableness in the Federal Court of Australia
Drawing from the litigation around the Hindmarsh Island Bridge (especially Chapman v Luminis Pty Ltd 2001) this article provides an analysis of judicial responses to anthropological expertise. Sensitive to the institutional responsibilities of judges, as well as rules of evidence, procedures and legal causes of action, it examines the strategic representation and appropriation of anthropological knowledge and practice. In exploring the relations …
Law and the uncooked – a reply
Daubert and the Exclusionary Ethos: The Convergence of Corporate and Judicial Attitudes towards the Admissibility of Expert Evidence in Tort Litigation
The article traces the way admissibility jurisprudence following Daubert has come to emphasize the importance of strict judicial gatekeeping; making it more difficult for plaintiffs to succeed in tort and product liability litigation. This exclusionary ethos appears to have been shaped by a range of values and interests which appear closely aligned to the perspectives promoted by corporate‐sponsored proponents of tort and evidence reform. The eff…
Anti-social Epistemologies
The recent First Amendment litigation in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005) raises many issues of interest to social science and humanities scholars. This paper will focus on just two: the scope afforded to Steve Fuller to present his STS perspectives; and the way the Court appears to have put this expertise to work. The Court’s formal receptiveness to Fuller’s testimony reflects the symbolic significance of science–religion encounte…
Law's Looking Glass: Expert Identification Evidence Derived from Photographic and Video Images
This article offers a critical overview of expert identification evidence based on images. It reviews the Australian case law and then, in an interdisciplinary manner, endeavours to explain methodological, technical and theoretical problems with facial mapping evidence. It suggests that extant admissibility jurisprudence and traditional safeguards associated with expert opinion evidence and the adversarial trial might not adequately protect those…
Atkins v The Emperor: The ‘Cautious’ Use of Unreliable ‘Expert’ Opinion
Keywords Expert evidence, CCTV, Facial mapping, Admissibility, Reliability, Identification, Photograph
A Contextual Approach to the Admissibility of the State's Forensic Science and Medical Evidence
This article examines the admissibility of forensic science and medicine in criminal proceedings. In Part ii, we explain how reliability-based admissibility standards in the United States have been unevenly applied to expert evidence in civil and criminal cases and have not prevented wrongful convictions. In Part iii, we review a recent Consultation Paper (and report) issued by the Law Commission of England and Wales. Though focused on the need f…
The Cool Crucible: Forensic Science and the Frailty of the Criminal Trial
Recent developments overseas and in Australia have thrown into question the assumption that the incriminating expert opinion evidence (ie forensic science and forensic medicine) relied on, routinely, in criminal trials is epistemologically robust. At the same time, scepticism about the efficacy of traditional safeguards has been rendered more acute when considering the capacity of the criminal trial to effectively manage incriminating expert evid…
Just truth? Carefully applying history, philosophy and sociology of science to the forensic use of CCTV images
Advice for the Courts? Sufficiently Reliable Assistance with Forensic Science and Medicine (Part 2)
In recent years, following public inquiries (for example, the Goudge Inquiry, 2007–08), reviews (for example, the US National Academy of Science, 2009; the Law Commission of England and Wales, 2011), systematic analysis of wrongful convictions (for example, Innocence Projects) and empirical studies, weaknesses with many types of forensic science and the frailty of the adversarial criminal trial have been exposed, though inadequately addressed. Dr…
Is Reliability Sufficient? The Law Commission and Expert Evidence in International and Interdisciplinary Perspective (Part 1)
This article offers a critical appraisal of the Law Commission's Report, Expert Evidence in Criminal Proceedings in England and Wales (2011), and related proposals for reform. Drawing upon interdisciplinary research and empirical studies from other common law jurisdictions it suggests that the introduction of a reliability-based admissibility standard for expert opinion evidence, even in conjunction with provision for recourse to court-appointed …
Justicia’s Gaze: Surveillance, Evidence and the Criminal Trial
This paper considers the use of the products of surveillance, primarily images, as evidence within the criminal trial. These products, whether static images, video or voice recordings, are increasingly being mediated for the fact-finder via ‘experts’, proffering an opinion about the meaning of some surveillance image, artefact or trace. Common law courts, including those in Australia, the UK, Canada, and the US, have been surprisingly accommodati…
Legal versus non-legal approaches to forensic science evidence
In their attempts to determine the admissibility and probative value of forensic science and medicine evidence, common law courts have tended to focus on considerations such as: the formal qualifications and training of the analyst, the analyst’s experience doing the same or similar things, the existence of a field, whether the evidence might assist the jury, apparent partisanship and plausibility, the overall strength of the case and even the pe…
Judicial notice: Beyond adversarialism and into the exogenous zone
Recent Australian decisions regarding courts’ unilateral access to exogenous (ie non-legal) knowledge have been restrictive, reflecting a strong commitment to the adversarialist principle of party presentation. With reference to underlying goals of factual accuracy, efficient dispute resolution, fairness and institutional integrity we argue that the restrictions should be loosened. The strict principle of party presentation, with only narrow scop…
A little ignorance is a dangerous thing: Engaging with exogenous knowledge not adduced by the parties
Using a recent trial and appeal in Canada as an example, this essay reviews our conventional reticence to allowing judges to draw the attention of counsel to issues that might influence the assessment of forensic science evidence in criminal proceedings. We question the institutional commitment to judicial non-intervention and suggest that on many occasions judicial passivity or quiescence (rather than impartiality) threatens the fundamental goal…
Political science (26 works) · Law (25 works) · Sociology (22 works) · Psychology (18 works) · Epistemology (17 works) · Law (16 works) · Jury Decision Making Processes (13 works) · Law in Society and Culture (12 works) · Medical Malpractice and Liability Issues (11 works) · Adversarial system (9 works)