Expert Testimony in Fire Origin and Cause Cases

Frye test . In that case Justice Blackmun , writing for the Court , noted that the general acceptance test was a cornerstone of the Frye decision , and that the Frye Test had been the dominant standard for the admissibility of new scientific evidence at trial for seventy years

Blackmun noted that the Federal Rules of Evidence would be evaluated like any other legislatively enacted statute . The rules in general were interpreted liberally and that was at odds with the rigidity of the Frye decision . In Beech Aircraft Corp v . Rainey the Court recognized that

br the general approach of the rules were to relax the barriers to opinion testimony (Beech

Expert Witnesses and Testimony in Fire and Arson Cases Page 4 of 8

Aircraft Corp . v . Rainey 1988 . Therefore Frye was incompatible with the Federal Rules of Evidence and should not be used in federal trials (Daubert v . Dow 1993

Blackmun does clarify that Rules themselves place a limit on whether or not supposedly scientific evidence can be admitted at trial . It is still incumbent on the judge to assure that the evidence is not only reliable but also relevant . Rule 702 clearly regulates the admission of evidence . The evidence must be scientific , technical , or other specialized knowledge (Daubert v . Dow (1993 . The subject of the testimony must be such that the scientific method applies . Knowledge implies that more than just subjective belief in the theory or practice exists . This is not meant to imply that the subject matter of the testimony must be regard as absolute fact . In science , there is little if anything , that is considered fact . Science is simply a process for refining theories based on new evidence and discoveries . To qualify as scientific knowledge , the evidence must have been derived form processes that utilize the scientific method (Daubert v...