Faculty of Computing, Health and Science
School of Computer and Security Science
It is very important that when we use science to determine the validity of evidence or information that it is done in a manner that is acceptable to the scientific community and the legal community, but what happens when “experience” is used. The use of forensic practitioners to provide „expert‟ evidence and opinion must meet the Daubert/Frye and now Kumho tests. This paper will endeavour to demonstrate .what is best for a practitioner to have and what does the judiciary require for „expert‟ evidence to be accepted? Science and/or Experience, what is more relevant? Evidence and the Courts depend upon the establishment of a reliable basis of fact. because at the end of a trial, a Judge or a Jury will be compelled to reduce a complex slice of human experience with all its subtlety, to what is, in essence, a one line answer: “I believe you, or I don't.”.