Daubert V. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals

As we discussed in class that North Carolina is a Daubert state, so how did the Daubert motion change the court system. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals was a case in 1993 where the Daubert and other minors (Plaintiffs) was trying to sue the Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals (Defendant) for suffered limb reduction birth defects (Daubert v. Merrell Dow Phamaceuticals, Inc, 2018). The plaintiffs claim that the drugs that there mother ingested from the defendant that manufactured the drug caused the defects of the child at birth. This case forced the experts party to prove that the expert is based their opinion on legitimate scientific facts and not just by stating their opinion (Daubert v. Merrell Dow Phamaceuticals, Inc, 2018). If there is a “Daubert Hearing” it is usually conducted before the trail with no jury, the court will consider a lot of factors to determine if the expert’s testimony would be accepted in court (The Daubert Standard and Expert Witnesses 2012, May 18). Here are some factors the court will look at, whether the experts theory has been tested, if the experts theory has been look over by a peer (someone in the same field), if there is standards that control the theory’s operation, if the theory has known or potential rate of error and what it is, and to what degree the relevant scientific community has accepted the theory (The Daubert Standard and Expert Witnesses 2012, May 18).

Fingerprint analysis is a good tool to help solve a crime or to identify a person. The reason for this is every individual has there on unique patterns. They have did a lot of research over decades to see if anyone has the same pattern but have not found anyone with the same matching prints (Giannelli, P. 2006). Fingerprinting can help solve crimes if they can get the print to be determine if they can be read. But with fingerprint analysis there are limitations if the prints are collected there has to be known print that it can be compared