-
Asked by cheesepuffqueen to Austin, Kirsty, Nicola, Nike, Sarah on 18 Jun 2012.
-
Kirsty Ross answered on 18 Jun 2012:
A lot of evidence that is now presented in court is science based. For example, DNA profiles, insects recovered from human remains and other forensic evidence. It is important that you can understand the basic science behind these methods so that you can spot any errors and explain it clearly to a jury. No method is 100% perfect, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that the science is ‘wrong’. Being ‘science literate’ will make the job of lawyer a lot easier!
-
-
Austin Elliott answered on 18 Jun 2012:
Other more general things law and science have in common are analysing problems in great detail, sort of ‘taking something apart’, and having to be very precise and accurate, both in analysing and writing. I was struck by this when I wrote some stuff about libel laws and science a few years back.
Agree with Kirsty about the forensics. I’m a TV science geek so I like watching the CSI TV shows and trying to spot if they’ve made mistakes any about the science!!
One really famous legal case in the US which ended up with lawyers arguing about the science and the forensics was the OJ Simpson murder case, which was televised live in the US in 1995 and had the whole country gripped.
Comments
cheesepuffqueen commented on :
oh wow! thank you so much I had no idea quite how much it was used.
Austin commented on :
There are also lawyers who specialise only in stuff to do with patents, which is another area where scientific training would be a big help.
A lot of people who become lawyers have done University degrees other than law – they do a one-year postgraduate conversion course afterwards (see here for some info), and then train further to be a solicitor or a barrister.