Pacemaker PTSD? Pacemaker PTSD?

Pacemaker PTSD?

This is primarily a case for cardiologists, cardiac nurses and anaesthetists with a learning point for psychiatric experts. Viewed from outside the...
Advising as to the applicable law Advising as to the applicable law

Advising as to the applicable law

The detail of this judgment is for experts who conduct capacity assessments. Two points arise of more general interest. First, the expert, who had...
Evidentiary reliability and the meaning of words Evidentiary reliability and the meaning of words

Evidentiary reliability and the meaning of words

This case has a number of important features of general interest. It illustrates the importance of assessing the reliability of a subject’s...
Podcast Episode 11: AI and the Expert Witness Podcast Episode 11: AI and the Expert Witness

Podcast Episode 11: AI and the Expert Witness

In the 11th episode of the Expert Matters Podcast, we take a look at how AI is being used by Expert Witnesses. We discuss general developments related...
EWI publishes new Guidance on Expert Discussions and Joint Statements EWI publishes new Guidance on Expert Discussions and Joint Statements

EWI publishes new Guidance on Expert Discussions and Joint Statements

We have just refreshed our guidance on ‘Expert Discussions and Joint Statements' in the EWI Knowledge Hub...

Check out our Case Updates and Member Magazine

Looking for more news relevant to the Expert Witness community? Why not check out our database of cases relevant to Expert Evidence or the latest and previous editions of our member magazine, Expert Matters.

News

Clicking on one of the topics below will display news items relevant to that topic. You can also use the search bar below to identify news items.

R v Fitzsimmons v [2022] NICC 27
Priya Vaidya 2359

R v Fitzsimmons v [2022] NICC 27

byPriya Vaidya

“Can your paper trail be followed?”

 

The case: There was a gun attack on the police on the Crumlin Road, Belfast, on 5 December 2013. The defendants were charged with attempted murder and terrorism offences.  It is the prosecution case that the security services had secreted audio devices which picked up a conversation which the prosecution contend was an incriminating conversation between the three defendants. 

To continue reading you must be an EWI member, become a member and access exclusive content. 

Already a member? Login

 

Share

Print
Comments are only visible to subscribers.