Cross Examination
Due to the influence it has on the judge and jury's opinions, cross-examination is considered an important part of a jury trial. An attorney must know exactly how to extract testimony from the opposing witness that will help, not hurt, their client's case. Hence it is frequently referred to as an art form. In Francis L. Wellmann's 1903 book The Art of Cross-Examination, great attention is paid to the components of cross-examination and their influence on trials. Cross-examination is an important part of the adversarial justice system. When a jury or judge's view on a witness is questioned, the jury or judge's opinion is frequently modified during cross examination. Other times, a trustworthy witness confirms or even strengthens their conviction in their earlier claims.
Cross examination of Forensic Psychologist as an expert witness
An expert witness is asked to give an unbiased opinion based on the information given to them. An expert witness is chosen because they possess the requisite credentials and/or extensive expertise in a certain field. Experts are frequently consulted for comments on the severity of an injury, degree of insanity, reason of a machine or other equipment failure, loss of earnings, care expenses, and other matters. Although experts can testify in any case where their expertise is relevant, forensic scientists or forensic psychologists are more likely to be used in criminal cases, whereas forensic engineers, forensic accountants, or care experts are more likely to be used in civil cases, such as personal injury.
​
A psychologist is a mental health specialist who treats mental illnesses via psychotherapy and behavioural therapies. In a variety of issues, from criminal trials to personal injury claims and family law problems, a psychologist testifying as an expert witness will present information to courts and tribunals. A psychologist can address questions on psychological harm, experience of post-traumatic stress disorder, effect of taking a child away from family, if the defendant was suggestible or compliant, intellectually impaired and if their prognosis would improve with therapy by spending time with a solicitor's client and/or reviewing their medical records.
​
A forensic psychologist is a professional who evaluates and treats criminal behaviour. They are frequently relied upon to determine mental capacity or to conduct a clinical evaluation of a person's mental fitness to stand trial. They also provide guidance in matters involving family and personal injury. When serving as an expert witness, a forensic psychologist must ensure that the evidence they present is of suitable quality and is based on relevant research and evidence. When choosing a psychologist as an expert witness, it is ensured that they have the relevant expertise and communication skills to deliver their conclusions in Court, either in writing or vocally.
​
If the witness is called to testify in court, practically all of the materials used to prepare the testimony will be made public. Experts are instructed not to take notes on documents because the other side would have access to them. The criteria of Fed. R. Evid. 702 must be met by an expert testifying in court. [4] In general, a person with "scientific, technical, or other specialised knowledge" who may "assist the trier of fact," which is usually a jury, is considered an expert under Rule 702. A competent expert may testify "in the form of an opinion or otherwise" provided the following conditions are met: "(1) the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles, and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case."
Forensic psychologists serve as expert witnesses in a variety of civil and criminal court proceedings, which may include- civil proceedings (child custody cases), criminal proceedings (mental competency hearings) & professional negligence lawsuits (medical malpractice suites, for example).
​
Forensic psychologists can serve as forensic expert witnesses on a voluntary or involuntary basis, which means they can be hired or subpoenaed by a prosecution or defence team. They have an obligation and a duty to stay aware of the ethical duties that govern their conduct when engaged in judicial processes since their job is critical to many judicial procedures.
​
Forensic psychologists must be knowledgeable in the areas that pertain to the evidence they present and the testimony they provide. They must also fulfil the Federal Rules of Evidence's witness requirements, which include possessing the necessary experience, knowledge, abilities, training, and education. According to the American Psychological Association's Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychology, forensic psychologists must have "psychological and legal knowledge, training, experience, and skills sufficient to perform the essential services."
​
As psychological forensic expert witnesses, forensic psychologists must be well-versed in the law. They can be classified as knowledgeable, proficient, or specialised depending on their credentials.
​
To be effective expert witnesses, forensic psychologists must have knowledge of a specific demographic as well as experience using that knowledge in a forensic setting. Individuals with mental or emotional illnesses, as well as those with unique features important to a legal judgement, may be included in the clinical forensic population.
​
In their role as expert witnesses, forensic psychologists convey their thoughts based on their specific knowledge. In most jurisdictions, they are required to express their views within the bounds of their profession and with a fair degree of confidence. As expert witnesses, forensic psychologists may offer their opinion on the cause or consequences, interpret the actions of others, draw conclusions on the basis of circumstances, comment on the likelihood of events, and state their beliefs about nonfactual issues, such as fault, damage, negligence, avoidability.
​
When the forensic psychologist is in the position of having his qualifications and experience impeached, he may suffer acute embarrassment unless he has been completely truthful and modest about his competency as an expert. If the witness cannot be satisfactorily deflected by this attack on his professional standards and competence, the cross-examining counsel may, as a last resort, attack the character of the witness.
​
Skills of an Expert Witness
Goals of Cross Examination
The purpose of cross- examination is to thoroughly investigate the expert witness; it is the forensic psychologist's raison d'être (reason for being). The experts may provide their own conclusions on the evidence without cross-examination, and the court would be no further forward. Cross-examination is a judicial method of determining if two seemingly opposing sets of opinions may be reconciled to an acceptable degree.
Destructive goals of cross examination might include attacking any or all of the witness's premise, conclusion, or the thinking process by which the witness arrived at the conclusion. Expert witness cross-examination may also be used to reduce the overall impact of the expert's testimony, thereby adopting a type of damage control without outright annihilation. This can be accomplished by discussing with the witness the potential of drawing different inferences or conclusions from the evidence presented. The cross-examiner may try to bind the witness to a particular that may subsequently be refuted by another expert who is equally or better competent.
Cross-examination of expert witnesses can also have constructive goals, such as obtaining confirmation or indirect support for the cross-own examiner's expert's conclusions. In order to criticise the findings, every statement of fact in an expert report should be examined to discover how it is based on other underlying facts or assumptions and whether they may be contested or disturbed.
References
1)Brigden, Victoria (2018). "Cross-examination of expert witnesses" NSWBarAssocNews 67; (2018, Spring) Bar News: Journal of the NSW Bar Association 56 (From Bar News: The Journal of the New South Wales Bar Association; 1 January 2018; 55 KB)
​
2)Ehrhardt, Charles W. and Stephanie J. Young, "Using Leading Questions During Direct Examination", Florida State University Law Review, 1996.
​
3)Gudjonsson, G. H., & Haward, L. (1998). Forensic Psychology: A Guide to Practice (1st ed.). Routledge.
​
4)How to Become a Forensic Psychologist. (2021, June 29). Forensic Psychologists as Expert Witnesses | Job Description, Certification and Practice Guidelines. How to Become a Forensic Psychologist | Forensic Psychology Education and Licensing Guides by State. https://www.forensicpsychologyedu.org/expert-witness/
​
5)Forensic Reports and Testimony: A Guide to Effective Communication for Psychologists and Psychiatrists Hardcover September 9, 2014. (2021). wiley; 1 edition (september 9, 2014).
6)Weiner, I. B., & Otto, R. K. (2013). The Handbook of Forensic Psychology (4th ed.). Wiley.
​