Results
(208 Answers)

Answer Explanations

  • Yes
    user-669412
    Designated corporate witness
  • No
    user-265910
    Courts not have any mechanism to consider and involve scientific experts in decision making for modern day issues. 
  • No
    user-237381
    I wasn't a witness but I wrote an expert report for a vaccine trial
  • Yes
    user-919082
    As an expert witness/participant, I have witnessed a wide disparity in what is argued as constituting best science for supporting litigation decisions, with surprising disparities of opinions among recognized experts even over science matters that are generally appreciated as foundational to the science under consideration, e.g., extremely high doses in animal toxicity studies do not meaningful predict toxicity outcomes for human exposures that are demonstrably many orders of magnitude below effect and no effect levels in animal  toxicity studies.
  • Yes
    user-906902
    In a rare disease and abortion without possibility of genetic transmission 
  • Yes
    user-925409
    I've served as an expert witness on a wide variety of cases, most recently pertaining to endocrine disruption.  
  • Yes
    user-523578
    Medical malpractice related to surgery.
  • Yes
    user-404499
    I have been on both sides in different cases/investigations, some of them on a national level. 
  • Yes
    user-475346
    I have provided expert witness testimony in my subspecialty field.
  • Yes
    user-471505
    I once served as an expert witness on an academic appointment to a state university.
  • Yes
    user-156266
    Actually served as respondent/Company representative as person most qualified/knowledgable (PMQ-PMK) but because of technical expertise I do insert technical expert points. 
  • No
    user-776568
    No, but I was part of a pool of experts in a murder case in which the culprit was identified solely on the basis of the genetic profile of stains of biological origin on the corpse
  • Yes
    user-585260
    The first answered the question: Does drug X have a causal relationship to health outcome(s) Y.

    The second answered the question: Are e-cigarettes epidemic in the U.S., and are they harmful to youth and young adult health?  Also, describe a scientifically valid e-cigarette abatement plan (in U.S. areas 1-9) to reduce the youth and young adult e-cigarette vaping prevalence.
  • Yes
    user-444118
    I provided expert analysis that indicated that water pollution that had killed the fish in a pond was due to chemicals being used by a neighboring property that had washed off that property into the stream draining into the pond. Fish were abundant in the pond prior to the neighbor's use of the chemicals. 
  • Yes
    user-208008
    I was an expert witness on a missed diagnosis. I was fair, but honest.
  • Yes
    user-200863
    Several litigations, both for the defendants and plaintiff. 
    My personal experience is that whenever I submit my written expert testimony telling a convincing story backed by the science that is simple enough for the jurors to understand, attorney of the opposite party try their best to throw my testimony using lame arguments, like I don't have enough expert witness experience, etc. They try to do the same to my depositions, very frustrating. When they cannot dispute the scientific facts, they try to throw the whole report and/or deposition.
  • No
    user-211258
    Often, scientific evidence is not relevant; but, when it is, lawyers/judges don't know how to understand and employ scientific studies.
  • No
    user-860974
    No, I haven't.
  • Yes
    user-879267
    focused on the Endangered Species Act
  • Yes
    user-377267
    Confidential

    Some judges have a good understanding of the science behind toxicology and risk assessment, others don't!
    We may need more simple examples to illlustrate a risk to a non-scientist
  • Yes
    user-202279
    Ibtestified on the behalf of the defence in a case a police officer was accused of having used lethsl force. The cop was awuitted.
  • Yes
    user-553491
    Depositions and cross-examinations, both for plaintiffs and for defendants.
  • Yes
    user-698496
    I was asked to testify in a dispute between CDMO and sponsor.
  • Yes
    user-304684
    Malpractice 
  • Yes
    user-234128
    Psychological assessment in civil and criminal cases.
  • Yes
    user-935064
    I  was involved in a few natural resource damage cases.  Additionally, I served on review panels that operated under many of the same conditions as used in qualifying one as an expert witness.
  • Yes
    tox-expert
    I have testified in Court 11 times and given more than 60 depositions.
  • Yes
    user-180243
    Yes for the Judge, the defendant and the public prosecutor. While the defendant chose me based on the CV, sometimes I found that the Judge or the public prosecutor chose me based on my university position rather that on my specific expertise. 
  • Yes
    user-777357
    I wrote expert white papers that discuss the strength of the science to support claims for dietary supplements. 
  • No
    user-843923
    I have explored the validity of a lie detector (aIAT) used in court settings
  • Yes
    user-767602
    Only for my job, that is Vascular Surgery.
  • Yes
    user-957551
    I've testified in court a couple to times on the side of plaintiffs (one being a private individual and the other being a State governmental agency).  I've also been an expert witness in a number of adjudicatory hearings involving regulatory agency cases.  I've also written opinions that are filed as briefs in civil lawsuits.
  • Yes
    user-813332
    I have been an expert witness in a public inquiry rather than a court case.
  • No
    user-960566
    But data that I generated was used as evidence to support a public interest litigation.
  • Yes
    user-316370
    In industrial accidents cases
  • No
    user-966722
    I never been an expert witness in a court case, because I do not have licence for it. Until now, never tried to get that licence, although I am qualified expert of the Roster of the Secretary-General’s Mechanism for Investigation of Alleged use of Chemical, Biological and Toxin Weapons (UNSGM), from the 2015.
  • Yes
    user-855888
    My opinions are referred in courts quite some times, indirectly.
  • Yes
    user-269814
    It was a case of an operator of radio frequency transmitters who was ill with cancer. There was sound scientific evidence of probable causation of the cancer by the radio frequency radiation. The organization accused had unlimited financial resources and used them to guide the court to a long process with well financed 'expert witnesses' leading to the denial of cancer causation by the radiation. The decission was not final but the victim was exhausted and dropped the case.
  • Yes
    user-602450
    As an expert physician I wrote a detailed analysis for a case 
  • No
    user-573537
    In my country, Mexico, there are very specific requisites for a professional in my field, Medicine, to be regarded as an expert. Moreover, since most of the occasions these interventions are not subject to remuneration, participating is not attractive for individuals who otherwise could be regarded as the best exponents of medical practice, and that is the cause that very often those regarded as "experts" from the legal point of view are not indeed individuals practicing medicine in the real world, but colleagues that are more in the purely academic ground.
  • Yes
    user-639454
    The diagnosis asked by jury.
  • No
    user-608413
    I have not been requiered in my country
Please log in to comment.