Reconsidering the Admissibility of Expert Forensic Evidence in South African Criminal Proceedings
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2025/v28i0a17943Keywords:
Admissibility, expert forensic evidence, reliability, forensic science, reliability standardsAbstract
Expert forensic evidence can be of great assistance in criminal proceedings. However, the question that must be answered is whether and to what extent there is science in any forensic science discipline. In the last twenty years there have been growing concerns about the admissibility and reliability of expert evidence in criminal trials. Many common law jurisdictions have raised concerns about traditional admissibility standards and their inability to filter out unreliable expert forensic evidence. As a result of these concerns, a number of these jurisdictions have adopted and now apply reliability criteria for the admissibility of this evidence.
In South Africa, expert forensic evidence is admissible if it is relevant. The reliability of the evidence is determined at the end of the trial when the evidence is evaluated. This article examines this position and argues that the current position does not require an assessment of the reliability of expert forensic evidence at the admissibility stage, allowing expert forensic evidence of doubtful reliability to be admitted. It is argued that the admissibility of this evidence should be reconsidered by introducing a reliability standard as a precondition for admissibility.
Downloads
References
Bibliography
Literature
Bernstein DE and Jackson JD "The Daubert Trilogy in the States" 2004 Jurimetrics 1-16
Bonventre CL "Wrongful Convictions and Forensic Science" 2021 WIREs Forensic Science 1-12 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/wfs2.1406
Colvin E "Convicting the Innocent: A Critique of Theories of Wrongful Convictions" 2009 Criminal Law Forum 173-192 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10609-009-9100-6
De La Rey JH The Fact-Finding Process and Burden of Proof During Litigation (LLM-thesis University of Pretoria 2007)
Dror IE and Morgan RM "A Futuristic Vision of Forensic Science" 2019 Journal of Forensic Science 8-10 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.14240
Edmond G "Impartiality, Efficiency, or Reliability? A Critical Response to Expert Evidence Law and Procedure in Australia" 2010 Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences 83-99 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00450610903258128
Edmond G "Is Reliability Sufficient? The Law Commission and Expert Evidence in International and Interdisciplinary Perspective (Part 1)" 2012 International Journal of Evidence and Proof 30-65 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1350/ijep.2012.16.1.391
Edmond G and Meintjies-Van der Walt L "Blind Justice? Forensic Science and the Use of Closed-Circuit Television Images as Identification Evidence in South Africa" 2014 SALJ 109-141
Edmond G and Roach K "A Contextual Approach to the Admissibility of the State's Forensic Science and Medical Evidence" 2011 UTLJ 343-409 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/tlj.2011.0025
Edmond G and San Roque M "The Cool Crucible: Forensic Science and the Frailty of the Criminal Trial" 2012 CICJ 51-68 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10345329.2012.12035944
Edmond G et al "Admissibility Compared: The Reception of Incriminating Expert Evidence in Four Adversarial Jurisdictions" 2013 U Denv Crim L Rev 31-71
Garrett BL "Wrongful Convictions" 2020 Annu Rev Criminol 245-259 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-criminol-011518-024739
Garrett BL "Judging Innocence" 2008 Col L Rev 55-142 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00228958.2008.10516494
Garrett BL and Fabricant M "The Myth of the Reliability Test" 2018 Fordham L Rev 1559-1599
Gatowski SI et al "Asking the Gatekeepers: A National Survey of Judges on Judging Expert Evidence in a Post-Daubert World" 2001 Law and Human Behavior 433-458 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012899030937
Giannelli PC "The Admissibility of Novel Scientific Evidence: Frye v United States, a Half-Century Later" 1980 Col L Rev 1197-1250 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1122061
Griffin L "The Correction of Wrongful Convictions: A Comparative Perspective" 2001 Am U Int'l L Rev 1241-1308
Haneef SSS "Forensic Evidence: A Comparative Analysis of the General Position in Common Law and Sharīah" 2007 Islamic Studies 199-216 DOI: https://doi.org/10.52541/isiri.v46i2.4308
Kaplan AB and Puracal JC "It's Not a Match: Why the Law Can't Let Go of Junk Science" 2018 Alb L Rev 895-939
Koehler JJ, Mnookin JL and Saks MJ "The Scientific Reinvention of Forensic Science" 2023 PNAS https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2301840120 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21428/cb6ab371.359696f4
Lewis C "A Mixed Legal System with a Constitution on Top: South African Law in the Era of Democracy" 2018 Amicus Curiae 12-14 DOI: https://doi.org/10.14296/ac.v2005i57.1082
Maxwell J "Preventing Miscarriages of Justice: The Reliability of Forensic Evidence and the Role of the Trial Judge as Gatekeeper" Paper presented at the Conference of the International Society for the Reform of Criminal Law in San Francisco (July 2017 San Francisco)
Meintjies-Van der Walt L "Expert Evidence and the Right to a Fair Trial: A Comparative Perspective" 2001 SAJHR 301-319 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02587203.2001.11827628
Meintjies-Van der Walt L "An Overview of the Use of DNA Evidence in South African Criminal Courts" 2008 SACJ 22-62
Meintjies-Van der Walt L "Tracing Trends: The Impact of Science and Technology on the Law of Criminal Evidence and Procedure" 2011 SALJ 147-171
McQuiston-Surrett D and Saks MJ "The Testimony of Forensic Identification Science: What Expert Witnesses Say and What Factfinders Hear" 2009 Law and Human Behavior 436-453 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-008-9169-1
O’Brien E, Daeid NN and Black S "Science in the Court: Pitfalls, Challenges and Solutions" 2015 Phil Trans R Soc B http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0062 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0062
Olaborede AO and Meintjies-Van der Walt L "The Dangers of Convictions Based on a Single Piece of Forensic Evidence" 2020 PELJ 1-38 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2020/v23i0a6169
Olckers A "DNA Evidence in South Africa: Lessons Learned to Date" 2013 Forensic Science International: Genetics 160-161 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigss.2013.10.083
Saks MJ and Faigman DL "Failed Forensics: How Forensic Science Lost Its Way and How It Might Yet Find It" 2008 Annu Rev Law Soc Sci 149-171 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.4.110707.172303
Schmidt CWH and Rademeyer H Law of Evidence (LexisNexis Durban 2013)
Schwikkard PJ and Van der Merwe SE Principles of Evidence 4th ed (Juta Cape Town 2015)
Skorupka J "The Rule of Admissibility of Evidence in the Criminal Process of Continental Europe" 2021 Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal 93-122 DOI: https://doi.org/10.22197/rbdpp.v7i1.526
Stockdale M and Jackson A "Expert Evidence in Criminal Proceedings: Current Challenges and Opportunities" 2016 JCL 344-362 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0022018316668448
The Law Commission Consultation Paper No 190: The Admissibility of Expert Evidence in Criminal Proceedings in England and Wales: A New Approach to the Determination of Evidentiary Reliability (The Law Commission London 2009)
The Law Commission Expert Evidence in Criminal Proceedings in England and Wales (Law Com No 325) (The Stationary Office London 2011)
Thompson SG "Daubert Gatekeeping for Eyewitness Identifications" 2012 SMU L Rev 593-649
Visser J and Kruger U "Revisiting Admissibility: A Review of the Challenges in Judicial Evaluation of Expert Scientific Evidence" 2018 SACJ 1-25
Visser J and Scholtz D "Warnings from the West: Identification and Expert Evidence as Causes of Wrongful Convictions and the Implications for South Africa (Part 1)" 2023 AJICL 536-555 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3366/ajicl.2023.0465
Young G and Goodman-Delahunty J "Revisiting Daubert: Judicial Gatekeeping and Expert Ethics in Court" 2021 Psychological Injury and Law 304-315 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-021-09428-8
Case law
Commonwealth v Cowans 756 NE 2D 622 (Mass App Ct 2001)
Daubert v Merrel Dow Pharmaceuticals 509 US 579 (1993)
Frye v United States 293 F 1013 (DC Cir 1923)
General Electric Co v Joiner 522 US 136 (1997)
Gentiruco AG v Firestone SA (Pty) Ltd 1972 1 SA 589 (A)
Holtzhauzen v Roodt 1997 3 All SA 551 (W)
Honeysett v The Queen (2014) 253 CLR 122
Kumho Tire Co v Carmichael 526 US 137 (1999)
Nduna v S (076/10) 2010 ZASCA 120 (30 September 2010) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1090820X10364647
R v Clark [2003] EWCA Crim 1020, [2003] 2 FCR 447 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-047429-8.50027-4
R v Dallagher [2002] EWCA Crim 1903, [2005] 1 Cr App R
R v Dlugosz [2013] 1 Cr App R 32
R v Mohan 1994 2 SCR 9
S v Burger 2010 2 SACR 1 (SCA)
S v Desai 1997 1 SACR 38 (W) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-25991-5_1
S v Gokool 1965 3 SA 461 (N)
S v Malindi 1983 4 SA 99 (T)
S v Mkhize 1998 2 SACR 478 (W)
S v Nala 1965 4 SA 360 (A) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/gj.3350040211
S v Nthati 1997 1 SACR 90 (O)
S v Phiri (CC512/2007) [2007] ZAGPHC 337 (4 December 2007)
S v Van As 1991 2 SASV 74 (W)
Savoi v National Director of Public Prosecutions (CCT 71/13) [2014] ZACC 5 (20 March 2014)
State v Krone 897 P 2d 621 (Ariz 1995)
Williamson v State 812 P 2d 384 (Okla Crim App 1991)
Legislation
Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977
Law Commission Act, 1965
Government publications
Federal Rules of Evidence 702: Testimony by Expert Witnesses (Act 2 of 1975)
Criminal Practice Directions (2015)
Internet sources
Innocence Project 2025 Misapplication of Forensic Science https://innocenceproject.org/misapplication-of-forensic-science/ accessed 29 January 2023
National Research Council, Committee on Identifying the Needs of the Forensic Sciences Community 2009 Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/
228091.pdf accessed 22 December 2024 DOI: https://doi.org/10.22233/20412495.1224.1
Executive Office of the President, President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology 2016 Report to the President. Forensic Science in Criminal Courts: Ensuring Scientific Validity of Feature-Comparison Methods https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/PCAST/pcast_forensic_science_report_final.pdf accessed 15 February 2025
Raphaely C 2018 Getting It Wrong — Guilty Until Proven Innocent https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2018-10-02-getting-it-wrong-guilty-until-proven-innocent/ accessed 15 January 2024
Wits Justice Project 2014 Submission to the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services on the Administration of Parole and Correctional Supervision https://static.pmg.org.za/
160920witsjustice.pdf accessed 30 January 2024
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Chevaure Du Pokoy
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
.png){kind=spacer}