Monday, June 21, 2010

Discount Galileo's Revenge: Junk Science In The Courtroom


Over All Rating Reviews :
Peter Huber is the principal critic of the rise of tort and consequent dilution of contract. His views on judicial nannying were well set out in his book "Liability". He now sets his sights on perverted or suspect science which he sees as a convenient tool to effect an extension of tort and product liability.

The book is an easy - not to say breezy - read. Despite the severe health warning I give them, my students all love this book. Huber's thesis is a simple one - bad science in the court room has helped to make bad law in the precedent book. He claims that there are too many cowboy scientists acting as hired guns and peddling their crank theories, half truths and cynical reservations to anyone who will buy their views.

The telling of the tale is quickfire, lay reader stuff rather than law review scholarship. This earned Huber a painstakingly scholarly refutation by Kenneth Cheesebro in his review article "Galileo's Retort". However, Huber's v! iews draw recent support in commentary by Zakaria Erzinclioglu in the journal Nature (4/30/1998)where a recently retired forensic scientist also claimed there were too many cowboy practitioners whose services can be brought at a price.

It's entertaining and thought provoking - but needs to be taken with a pinch of salt.

Get more detail about Galileo's Revenge: Junk Science In The Courtroom.


!1! Bowling Ball Free Shipping Today !1!: Vrey Cheap Gold Wedding Ring for You. !1!: Discount Mens Watches On Sale!







No comments:

Post a Comment


Twitter Facebook Flickr RSS



Français Deutsch Italiano Português
Español 日本語 한국의 中国简体。