1303

I would object that the testimony of the psychic is not admissible because

1) no foundation has been laid that the witness has and personal knowledge of the crime, so her LAY testimony is not admissible, and

2) she may not testify as an expert because parapsychology has not been shown to be a field of legitimate specialized knowledge that would help the jury, nor that its methods are scientifically reliable.

I would not object to her lack of qualifications -- There is an important distinction between the question of whether the FIELD is one of scientific or other specialized knowledge, and the question of whether the PERSON is qualified to be an expert.

Questions? Email tanford@indiana.edu and refer to 1303.

If the prosecution objected to the testimony of Ms. Renier on the ground that she lacked the qualifications necessary to be an expert, how should the defense respond? When you think you know the answer, click here