- May 6, 2020
- 1,133
- 1,213
- 118
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- White Male
That is a good point, but I don't think you can apply the rigors of peer review to court. Mostly because law is not a science. I'm not trying to criticize your response.I'm not disagreeing with your assessment of law, but on a more abstract level I find it quite fascinating that court cases can effectively involve aspects of scientific evidence assessed by hopelessly inappropriate means.
Imagine if the process of academic science publishing were not peer review, but two scientists with differing studies making a case to 12 non-experts, and the one that got published was the one that got the most votes.
Also it's not a majority vote. Unlike the UK, we don't allow minority verdicts in felony cases (see Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U.S. ___ (2020)). Not trying to be pedantic, just add some clarification.
Also, worth noting that there has to be some qualification for the expert, which is something the other side can (and frequently does) contest.
It's pretty fundamental to an adversarial system.Very much so.