Preface to the Second Edition

• Author: Alan D. Gold
• Pages: 15-16

[xv]

Preface to the Second Edition

   decade has passed since the rst edition. ere have been some

bright spots since then. Professor Lous’s undeserved forensic agony described

in her foreword to the rst edition had a happy ending. e Supreme Court of

Canada clearly embraced the scientic method in deciding upon the inadmissi-

bility of hypnotically re freshed “memories.” e faith expressed in the preface to

the rst edition that “[t]he courtroom, when it is populated by scientically lit-

erate lawyers and judges, is an excellent forum for the exposure of junk science”

was amply vindicated in some remarkable cases: in Kitzmiller et al. v. Doer Area

School District et al., Judge John E. Jones III, who was nominated by former U.S.

President George W. Bush, made a very strong ruling against “intelligent de-

sign,” holding that it was creationism and not science; and Dimmock v. Secretary

of State for Education & Skills, aer extensive evidence, judicially exposed the

“global warming” junk science in Al G ore’s movie An Inconenient Truth.

However, the hig hly anticipated p aradigm shi  in admissibi lity because of

the Daubert trilogy has failed to materiali ze, at least for the criminally accused ,

and the issues continue to bedevil courts. Examples of “expert” evidence that

have appeared in courtrooms recently include the following:

 Carol Tavris, “Whatever Happened to Ja ne Doe?” Skeptical Inquirer (January–February

), online: ww w.csicop.org/si/-/tavris.html.

R. v. Trochym, []  S.C.R. .

  F. Supp. d  (M.D. Pa. ), online: ww w.aclupa.org/downloads/De copinion.pdf.

 [] EWHC  (Admin), online: w ww.bailii.org /ew/cases/EWHC/

Admin//.html.

 See chapter , note  and accompanying text.

 e Honourable Mr. Justice W. Ian C. Binn ie, “Science in the Courtroom: e Mou se

at Roared” () : Advocates’ Soc. J. .