- During the investigation into the wounding case against Max, Harry, the bar tender told the Police that ‘Max was loud and unsteady on his feet when he arrived at the hotel and he was clearly drunk.’ Would this evidence be admissible as opinion evidence from Harry? Why? Why not? Give reasons.
- Due to a number of late night brawls, the hotel in Darlinghurst has recently installed high quality surveillance cameras. An ‘expert’, Valerie, has been called by the prosecution to give evidence identifying the offender from the video of the incident. Would this evidence be permitted for use as ‘expert’ opinion of identification? What if a Police Officer who knows Max from a previous matter, is called to give evidence identifying Max? Would this be admissible? Explain your reasons?
- What tests must be applied in order to decide whether or not a person holds specialised knowledge? How can new and emerging fields of knowledge become recognised by law? What are some of the benefits and dangers of recognising opinions based upon these fields of knowledge? Use specific examples from cases to show the relative benefits and dangers.
- To what extent do the rules of evidence and their judicial interpretation assist you to draw a distinction between a fact and an opinion? In your experience, do other disciplines, e.g. science, philosophy, history, economics, draw such a distinction and, if so, how and why?
