Show simple item record

FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorChin, Jason
dc.date.accessioned2020-09-24
dc.date.available2020-09-24
dc.date.issued2020-09-24
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2123/23471
dc.description.abstractThis article makes a case for pre-recorded, modularized expert evidence as a way to improve access to justice in some intimate partner violence (IPV) cases. Knowledge about the effects and dynamics of IPV regularly plays an important role in criminal trials. This knowledge is often beyond the ken of the factfinder, and thus can provide important context for the case facts. It may also assist in disabusing misconceptions surrounding IPV. Despite the potential value of this knowledge, several rules of evidence and the general nature of the Anglo-American trial process make it difficult to tender such evidence. For instance, trials prefer live testimony of expert witnesses over other means of conveying exogenous knowledge. These limitations place impecunious parties in regional areas at a disadvantage because they may struggle to find qualified experts. As a result, cross-examined pre-recorded modules about IPV (e.g., factors that prevent individuals from leaving abusive relationships, IPV as coercive control) may be helpful in some cases.en_AU
dc.language.isoenen_AU
dc.rightsCreative Commons Attribution 4.0en_AU
dc.subjectlawen_AU
dc.subjectevidenceen_AU
dc.subjectdomestic violenceen_AU
dc.subjectbattered woman syndromeen_AU
dc.subjectexpert evidenceen_AU
dc.subjectdauberten_AU
dc.subjectmohanen_AU
dc.subjectuniform evidence lawen_AU
dc.titlePre-recorded expert evidence in intimate partner violence casesen_AU
dc.typePreprinten_AU
dc.subject.asrc18 Law and Legal Studiesen_AU
dc.subject.asrc1801 Lawen_AU
usyd.facultySeS faculties schools::The University of Sydney Law Schoolen_AU
workflow.metadata.onlyNoen_AU


Show simple item record

Associated file/s

Associated collections

Show simple item record

There are no previous versions of the item available.