Full Description
Critical Evidence taps into a growing body of scholarship that demonstrates evidence law is fundamentally about power, setting the boundaries of whose voices will be heard and what types of knowledge will be cognizable in courts of law in the United States. The book brings together leading and emerging Critical Evidence scholars to examine the major rules that govern admissibility in court, from relevancy to hearsay to privileges. These scholars show that many such rules are not neutral as constructed or applied, but, in fact, privilege insiders at the expense of outsiders, namely poor people, women, people of color, disabled people, and LGBTQ+ people. Through a close reading of rules and doctrine, Critical Evidence shows that evidence law must and should change in order to serve as a system that promotes truth, justice and fairness for all in the American legal system.
Contents
Foreword Edward Cheng; Introduction Bennett Capers, Jasmine E. Harris and Julia Simon-Kerr; Part I. Introduction to the Field and Its Actors: Section1. The Rulemakers; Introduction; Prosecutors and Federal Evidence Rulemaking Julia Simon-Kerr; Evidence Rulemaking and Community Participation Ngozi Okidegbe; The Living Rules of Evidence Alex Nunn; Section 2. And Jurors; Introduction; Factual Ambiguity and a Theory of Evidence Ronald Allen; The Jury's Rise as Lie Detector George Fisher; (Un)Common Knowledge and Experience Jasmine E. Harris; Pena-Rodriguez v. Colorado, Jury Secrecy, and the Performance of Racial Justice Daniel S. Harawa; Part II. The Rules: Section 1. Relevance and Prejudice; Introduction; Relevance, Reconsidered Asees Bhasin; The Relevance and Prejudice of Poverty Evidence Michele Gilman; Toward a Critical Race Theory of Evidence Jasmine Gonzales Rose; Section 2. Character Evidence; Introduction; Character (Evidence) Assassination Andrea Dennis; Disability as a Character Chameleon Jasmine E. Harris; Different Spanks for Different Ranks: A Critical Appraisal of Character Evidence in Courts-Martial Franklin D. Rosenblatt; Evidence Without Rules Bennett Capers; Judging Demeanor Kiel Brennan-Marquez and Julia Simon-Kerr; Section 3. Credibility; Introduction; Law's Credibility Problem Julia Simon-Kerr; Teaching Impeachment Anna Roberts; Section 4. Sex Trials; Introduction; Real Women, Real Rape Bennett Capers; Unchaste and Incredible: The Use of Gendered Conceptions of Honor in Impeachment Julia Simon-Kerr; Feminist Take(s) on (Sexual) Bad Acts Caroline Davidson; Section 5. Hearsay and Confrontation; Introduction; The Neglected Origins of the Hearsay Rule in American Slavery: Recovering Queen v. Hepburn David Alan Sklansky; Examining the American Hearsay Prohibition's Roots in Slavery Jeffrey Bellin; Hearsay and Confrontation from a Feminist Gaze Aviva Orenstein; Hearsay in Immigration Proceedings and the Problem with Symmetry Gabriela Rodriguez; Section 6. Experts; Introduction; Who Says You're Disabled? The Role of Medical Evidence in the ADA Definition of Disability Deirdre Smith; Recalibrating Expert Testimony Valena E. Beatty and Jennifer Oliva; Presumed Expertise: Police Officer Opinion Testimony Alexis Hoag-Fordjour; Party-Blind Review: A Proposal to Reduce Judicial Bias in Expert Evidence Admissibility Rulings Rebecca Wexler; Unequal Burdens of Proof: Racism, Legal Epistemic Injustice, and Opinion Testimony Jasmine Gonzales Rose; Section 7. Privileges; Introduction; Underprivileged: A ClassCrit Perspective on Evidentiary Privileges Tom Lininger; Parent-Child Privilege as Resistance Nila Bala; Part III. Expanding Evidence; Section 1. Decarceration and Abolition; Introduction; Bending Evidence Rules Towards Decarceration Erin Collins; Reimagining Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. as a Non-Reformist Reform Maneka Sinha; Section 2. And Beyond; Introduction; The Incoherence of Evidence Law Alex Nunn; The Anti-Transgender Medical Expert Industry Alejandra Caraballo; Race is Evidence/Evidence is Race: Flipping the Script on the 'Racial Lens' Montré Carodine.
