Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://anrows.intersearch.com.au/anrowsjspui/handle/1/13205
Record ID: f797eca6-0526-467d-aace-2bca22f0f606
Type: | Journal Article |
Title: | A tale of two experts: the Australian High Court takes a cautious stand |
Other Titles: | The Journal of criminal law |
Authors: | Hocking, Barbara Ann |
Keywords: | Legislation analysis;Psychological abuse;Criminal justice responses |
Year: | 2000 |
Publisher: | Pageant Publishing |
Citation: | 64 (2), April 2000 |
Notes: | Discusses the recent High Court decisions of two cases: Osland, in which the admissibility of expert evidence on battered woman syndrome (BWS) to assist in a defence of provocation was considered; and HG, a case involving the admissibility of evidence of prior sexual abuse under s 409B of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW). The facts and issues of each case are outlined and it is suggested that central to both decisions was a relatively cautious approach to syndrome evidence. Problems posed by novel or emerging forms of psychological evidence, such as child sexual abuse accommodation syndrome, for juries and judges are explored and it is argued that across jurisdictions, an increased understanding between the law and various branches of science and psychology is needed. |
URI: | https://anrows.intersearch.com.au/anrowsjspui/handle/1/13205 |
ISSN: | 0022-0183 |
Appears in Collections: | Journal Articles |
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in ANROWS library are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.