The register of court experts
Abstract
The article aims to analyze the content and assess the shape - currently functioning - of a register of court experts. It answers the question whether its present form is justified and fully objective. However, the main problem pervading the text is an attempt to determine: whether the Register of court experts performs its role, or if it requires modification, and if so deep? In order to provide full and reliable answer to the questions posed, I analyzed 45 registers of court experts kept by the Presidents of District Courts. This procedure allowed for constructive conclusions, as well as for the formulation of de lege ferenda postulates. I pointed out absurdities, shortcomings and unauthorized entry in the registers of people who have never made any opinion, and have been on them for many years, or present specialties that are in no way useful in court proceedings.
Keywords:
biegły sądowy, rejestr biegłych, prezes sądu okręgowego, swobodna ocenaReferences
Bernstein D., Jackson J, The Daubert trilogy in the States, Law and Economics, „Working Paper Series” 2004, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=498786. Google Scholar
Brennan M., Dilenschneider D., Levin M., Robinson J., Finding and researching experts and their testimony, http://virtualchase.justia.com/content/fnding-and-researching-experts-and-their-testimony. Google Scholar
Browne M., Williamson C., Barlacs L., The perspectival nature of expert testimony In the US, England, Korea and France, „Connecticut Journal of International Law” 2002–2003, Vol. 55. Google Scholar
Grabowska B., Pietryka A., Wolny M., Bodnar A., Biegli sądowi w Polsce, raport Polskiej Rady Biznesu i Helsińskiej Fundacji Praw Człowieka, Warszawa 2014, http://programy.hfhr.pl/monitoringprocesulegislacyjnego/fles/2014/04/biegli-s%C4%85dowifn.pdf. Google Scholar
Gruza E., Ratio est anima legis, czyli jak „biegli” sąbiegli sądowi, [w:] Gaudium in litteris est. Księga Jubileuszowa ofarowana Pani Profesor Genowefe Rejman z okazji osiemdziesiątych urodzin, (red.) L. Gardocki, Liber, Warszawa 2005. Google Scholar
Huyghe S., Chan A., The evolution of expert witness law under UK and US jurisdictions, http://www.jamsadr.com/fles/uploads/documents/gec-newsletter/jams-gec-news-2014-winter.pdf. Google Scholar
Informacja o wynikach kontroli 2015 r., Wyd. Najwyższej Izby Kontroli 2015, s. 27, Nr KPB-4114-001-00/214, nr ewid. 165/2015/I/14/006/kpb, https://www.nik.gov.pl/plik/id,9608,vp,11856.pdf. Google Scholar
Jagiełło D., Taktyka kryminalistycznych czynności dowodowych, C.H. Beck, Warszawa 2019 Google Scholar
Rager I., Marshall K., Examination of prior expert qualifcation and/or disqualifcation (questionable questions under the rules of evidence), „The Review of Litigation”2005, Vol. 24/3. Google Scholar
Sapir G., Qualifying the expert witness: a practical voir dire, „Forensic Magazine“ 2007, February/March, http://www.chm.uri.edu/forensics/courses/Appendix%20-%20forensic%20science%20&%20expert%20witness/Voir%20Dire.pdf. Google Scholar
Tomaszewski T., Dowód z opinii biegłego w procesie karnym, Inst. Ekspertyz Sądowych, Kraków 2000. Google Scholar
U.S. Federal Rules of Evidence, December 2013, http://judiciary.house.gov/_cache/fles/5334e54f-12cc-44b1-a0bc- 697e8e29bd15/evidence2013.pdf. Google Scholar
Zagadnienie dowodowe w procesie karnym, (red.) T. Gardocka, D. Jagiełło, C.H. Beck, Warszawa 2017. Google Scholar
Zienkiewicz D., Status biegłego sądowego, [w:] Wokół problematyki dokumentu. Księga pamiątkowa dedykowana Profesorowi Antoniemu Felusiowi, (red.) T. Widła, Wyd. UŚ, Katowice 2005. Google Scholar
