It is very important perceive the influence an knowledgeable testimony could have within the final determination made by a court docket. As well as, it’s useful for practitioners of forensic psychology to have the ability to learn and perceive authorized circumstances.
Duties:
Click on to overview the case Commonwealth of Virginia v. Allen (2005).
The case describes an appellate authorized opinion or court docket determination involving knowledgeable witness testimony. When a case is appealed, it goes to an appellate or to the next court docket. The appellate court docket then opinions the findings of the decrease court docket, which on this case was the trial court docket. The appellate court docket provided the next two opinions:
- The primary opinion (Commonwealth of Virginia v. Allen, 2005, pp. 1–24) is almost all opinion and is the one which counts.
- The second opinion (Commonwealth of Virginia v. Allen, 2005, pp. 24–31) is an opinion filed by a minority of judges who concurred (agreed) partly and dissented (disagreed) partly with the vast majority of the judges who dominated.
After studying the appellate authorized opinion, write a 2- to Three-page paper addressing the next:
- Talk about whether or not both of the knowledgeable witnesses on this case acted unethically. Help your opinion with the related Help write my thesis – APA or specialty moral pointers.
- Point out whether or not you agree with the bulk determination or the minority concurring or dissenting opinion. Clarify why.
The paper needs to be in Help write my thesis – APA model.
Reference:
Commonwealth of Virginia v. Allen, 609 S.E.second four (Va. 2005).
