DC Field | Value | Language |
dc.contributor.author | Mesele, Abreha | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-12-11T06:45:07Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2021-12-11T06:45:07Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2017-09 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/mlr.v11i1.9 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Judges render justice based on the presented evidence justifying their decisions.
In criminal cases, these decisions can have ramifications on an individual’s right
to liberty, life and property. Correctness of conviction much depends on the
evidence presented to the courtroom and the interpretation of the evidence by
judges. Expert evidence is particularly important because certain issues are
beyond the expertise of judges in the current era of specialization and due to everexpanding
advances in technology. Expert evidence has to be used very
cautiously based on a set of objective criteria that judges can use. This comment
looks at the experience of other countries in relation to admission of expert
evidence. It then assesses the current practice in Ethiopia by looking at a few
cases and concludes that there is wide variation in admitting expert evidence and
regarding the weight given to it by different courts. | en_US |
dc.language.iso | en_US | en_US |
dc.publisher | St.Mary's University | en_US |
dc.subject | Expert Evidence, admission, weight of evidence, criminal justice administration, Ethiopia | en_US |
dc.title | Vol. 11 No.1:The Standards in Admitting Expert Evidence in Ethiopia: Some Practical Discrepancies | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
Appears in Collections: | Mizan Law Review
|