Expert Conclusion As Evidence And Relative Studies

As an important type of evidence, expert conclusions are prepared by people who have special expertise. Being employed or appointed, they make use of their special knowledge or technical ability to observe and test the nature of the target objects and draw conclusions. With the development of the society, the variation of social interaction and the improvement of technology make it inevitable that the information involved in a case usually outruns the life experience of average people, so experts seem to be more and more necessary. Consequently, it's very important to research the foundamental theories of expert conclusions, their evidential effects and the conflicts between them in practice.This paper is divided into six parts. The first part is a brief introduction. It discusses the general issues of the expert conclusion system, such as its basic concepts, characteristics, functions clarifications and scientific conditions. As special type of evidence, expert conclusions have their intrinsic characteristics in their content as well as their forms. In the evidence system, expert conclusions are used to add to the judges' ability of cognition. Basically, they are judgments made by experts with their " specialized knowledge or technical ability". "Specialized knowledge and technical ability" belong to scientific knowledge, consequently, expert conclusions are called scientific evidence. Scientific conditions for expert conclusions refer to conditions ensuring the accountablility of the experts' work. The accountability roots in experience that is gained by experiments and observations. Expert conclusions (or expert testimony) are acquired through currently accepted methods or scientific ways. The scientific knowledge used in court should meet the following conditions: it can be examined and its falsifiability can be tested; it is scientifically accountable; it hasnecesarry relavance; and it can bear peer review.The second part is a comparison. It compares the expert conclusion system at home with expert evidence system abroad: on their history, values, characteristics and development. Different litigious modes have yielded different expert evidence systems. They have different values and legal characteristics. In continental-law countries, appraisers are called "judges' assistants", and they pay much attention to substantial truth and efficiency but somewhat neglect formal justice. In common-law countries, appraisers act as a party concerned, and they pay much attention to formal justice but to some extent neglect efficiency. Nowadays, in the reform to balance justice and efficiency, the two legal families tend to borrow from each other's system, such as: the start of appraisement has turned from optional to compulsory; the agreemenmt on appraisers is superior to their appointment; the status of appraisers has turned from dependent to independent; the two parts' agreement is more important than the procedure.The third part is the body part which discusses the competence of experts, a person who makes an expert conclusion is called expert witness in common law countries but appraiser in continental countries. Traditionally, they are different in their qualifications, characteristics, rights, duties, appointment, etc. However, such aspects tend .to become similar nowadays. There aren't any limits on the qualification of experts in common-law countries. So, anyone who are scientifically trained, or have acquired special technology from practice, can be an expert witness. On the contrary, continental-law countries set up an examination system of the appraisers' qualification. To ensure the objectivity of expert conclusions, the two legal families adopt different systems to guarantee their independence and neutrality. Independence means the expert doesn't belong to any organization and works independently; the work is done by the entrusted authenticator independently. Neutrality means the expert isn't biased against any party, is faithful to science and fact, and makes an objective and fair conclusion.In order to ensure...