To find out if we are abused by experts, saw in the many cases where a person acquitted on appeal in murder and child abuse, to name just two areas where this belief with the name removed. Almost without exception, conviction on the basis of “expert witness testimony”. In many cases, is the statement that only “evidence” by the prosecution and in many cases, that the “evidence” is not well explained or offered divided opinions. This problem has become so endemic in our judicial system, reform of an independent body – the Law Commission – has proposed reform, issued a consultation paper on how we accept the testimony of experts. This has serious consequences for those guilty and sentenced to be filled entirely on “Expert Testimony. In the case of Ben Roberts, for example, a serious crime against a child based on anything but expert testimony – especially since the testimony was, in fact, whether the crime has not been done and who did it. For the gravitational case and the consequences for yourself or someone you know, you should know the following estimates. If you are accompanied by a child who shows evidence of injury but where the date and time of the injury is believed to have occur at any time within 14 days, however, where there is no evidence that might have hurt a child, your presence alone is enough to condemn you! Does this seem ridiculous to you? Let me repeat. If at any time during the period 14 — day is expected to decide the police, chances are you are a candidate for the presence alone seemed enough to transfer it to you. CPS and police will certainly be rejected because the police were under great pressure to achieve “the target belief,” and CPS to work hand in hand with the police – although they should be separated completely. They are offering “Expert Testimony” as proof that the hard undeniable facts, if it can be in the truth that “expert testimony” just my opinion. As we all know, even the best medical experts and make mistakes. Finally, they were asked their opinion about something, even if their opinions are based on your skills and experience can not know everything based! Unless, of course, was regarded as perfect as God. In the case of Ben Roberts’s testimony “expert witness” all the evidence of a shared with all opinions, because the actual injury occurred. In other words, argues that the injuries clearly demonstrate, that has been caused deliberately broken. None of the experts testified to show that Ben Roberts has been involved in any way. However, the prosecution presented the “opinions” as fact “and insisted that the correct interpretation of the evidence clearly shows that the accused is guilty. Surprisingly, however, mentions none of the experts, the defendant at all. Field activities that conflict only in how the injuries caused, is based. Several experts acknowledged that they could not definitively state exactly how the injuries caused, the opinions about the most likely, but there is no single cause to explain. other experts, in their opinion as indisputable fact, without room for doubt – still have not come out to show that the defendant was the cause of the injury. Thus, the prosecution presented no eyewitnesses, no confession and no forensic evidence where the risk lies for us all. A Times Online quoted the following article: “Police forensic scientist Peter Ablett, who was Chairman of the Board on Registration of Forensic Practitioners, shows, there are only three ways to prove a crime: an eyewitness who can be relied upon, confession, or forensics. See” http:/ / business. Kleine Zeitung. Uk/tol/business/law/article2889323 Co.. Ece for the full article. Like the CPS and the Police Department can sue if there is no demand “proof” one’s guilt? “Is that where we abuse the public by people in positions of authority? Them where we place our trust in a fair and impartial trial and the investigation is only about the alleged crime, apparently running amok in our system and bring it to the level” may be true “in a country run by dictators and the military junta. Is this what we want, the British public? In another article, the Times Online, Professor Graham Zellick, chairman of the Criminal Cases Review Commission has cited an expert, he added, was only an expression of views. “I’m not sure that the jury is always understood. See http://www. Kleine Zeitung. Uk/tol/news/uk/article397224 Co.. Ece for the full article. Let’s see just explore, interact, such as the CPS and the Police. Police receive complaints about, and then send the details to the CPS, which, if the prosecution should continue to decide. They have guidelines they must follow, but they are only human and subject to the prejudices and opinions, as well as all of us. So It is possible that CPS may be satisfied by a particular police that? If you have the CPS to bring themselves under the guidelines, only if the evidence “clearly and easily presented in a” street, why should the case asked the court where there is no evidence points to the defendant? “We will now move to the adoption of the murky waters of research and public opinion. But we must be careful with our assumptions and opinion, as all the legal weight to fall on us if we are deemed slanderous or scandalous in our writings. Unfortunately, for us to make the public for not expert witnesses should be followed to maintain the same rules.