REVISITING THE CONTENT OF THE TERMS «EXPERT» AND «FORENSIC EXPERT»

Theory and Practice of Forensic Science, 2018

Full text Open access: Gold Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.30764/1819-2785-2018-13-1-6-16
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

The article presents a review of scientific works by Russian, Kazakh and Ukrainian scientists published over the period 1999–2017 and exploring the definitions of the terms «expert» and «forensic expert» in forensic science, and observes a variety of approaches to how these definitions are formed. The term «forensic expert» is analyzed as it appears in forensic science legislation of the CIS member states. The key limitations of these definitions are discussed, including inconsistencies with laws of logic, linguistic rules, and legislative drafting conventions. The author proposes to define the term «expert» as «an employee of a public or private forensic organization». This definition can be used in the development and improvement of legal norms regulating forensic services. Further, the author defines the term «forensic expert» as «a person entrusted to perform a forensic examination». The proposed definition can be used to improve criminal and civil procedure legislation in CIS member states.