Helen and Julie gave an overview of considerations taken by the DPP in relation to make this decision. This information can be gleaned from a range of different websites. Helen Parker quoted the Victorian site in her talk, but all of the other state Offices of the DPP have sites with discussion of the relevant issues.

Notes by Dr Maureen Phillips

OVERVIEW

The session began with an illustration of a poor forensic report and the impact this can have when giving evidence at court. Issues highlighted included:

• Terminology – use the right term for the right condition/injury
• Education of the court is an essential function of the expert witness
• Impartiality – regardless of whether the expert witness has been called by the prosecution or defence, the evidence given should be the same
• The expert witness’ opinion should be based on fact

The presenters generously shared their own experiences of giving evidence in court, and audience members also raised some issues they had had in court. Some of the issues discussed included:

• Aging any kind of injury is difficult, if not impossible, with any degree of precision
• Estimating the degree of force used to cause an injury is influenced by: the surface area the force is delivered over; variations in the victim; site of the injury (bone versus soft tissue)
• The victim described severe pain with penetration but there was no injury on examination? "Fear factor", vaginismus, PID, vestibulitis, deep non-visible structures
• When quoting references in a report, know them well! Take a copy of the article to court with you
• If a barrister quotes from a reference in court, ask to see the reference. Is it an old text? Selective quoting from the text? Who is the author, which journal is it in?

The session was very informative and entertaining, a great way to conclude the conference.

Notes by Dr Liz Sturgiss