Due process and the admission of expert evidence on recovered memory in historic child sexual abuse cases: lessons from America

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorRing, Sinead
dc.date.accessioned2020-06-23T18:59:52Z
dc.date.available2020-06-23T18:59:52Z
dc.date.issued2012
dc.description.abstractThis article reviews the decisions of the US state courts on the admissibility of expert testimony on recovered memory in historic child sexual abuse prosecutions. Unlike their English and Irish counterparts, most US courts scrutinise the reliability of expert evidence on recovered memory. In examining the US decisions the article explores the challenges posed to the criminal process by the contested scientific status of recovered memory theory. It sets out due process arguments why expert evidence on the topic should not be admitted in a criminal trial. (Author Abstract)en_US
dc.identifier.citationRing, Sinead. (2012). Due process and the admission of expert evidence on recovered memory in historic child sexual abuse cases: lessons from America. International Journal of Evidence & Proof, 16, 66-92.en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://core.ac.uk/reader/297036450  
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11212/4793
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherInternational Journal of Evidence & Proofen_US
dc.subjectchild abuseen_US
dc.subjectpsychological effectsen_US
dc.subjecttestimonyen_US
dc.subjectlegal reviewen_US
dc.titleDue process and the admission of expert evidence on recovered memory in historic child sexual abuse cases: lessons from Americaen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Files

Collections

CALiO Collection of Resources