R v Klamo: an example of miscommunication and misunderstanding of expert evidence where the conviction was later overturned

Author： Maxwell Chris  

Publisher： Taylor & Francis Ltd

ISSN： 0045-0618

Source： Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences, Vol.46, Iss.1, 2014-01, pp. : 4-7

Disclaimer: Any content in publications that violate the sovereignty, the constitution or regulations of the PRC is not accepted or approved by CNPIEC.

Previous Menu Next

Abstract

Related content

Misinterpretation of expert evidence in Wood v R

By Cross Rod  

Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences, Vol. 46, Iss. 4, 2014-10 ,pp. : 368-382

Taylor & Francis Ltd

Access to resources Recommend Favorite

R. Brinkmann, B. Madea (Hrsg.), Handbuch gerichtliche Medizin

By  

MedR - Medizinrecht, Vol. 22, Iss. 3, 2004-03 ,pp. : 160-160

Springer Publishing Company

Access to resources Recommend Favorite

Expected frequencies, exclusion percentages and ‘mathematical equivalence’: the probative value of DNA evidence in Aytugrul v The Queen

By Hamer David  

Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences, Vol. 45, Iss. 3, 2013-09 ,pp. : 271-283

Taylor & Francis Ltd

Access to resources Recommend Favorite

Expert evidence in reports and courts

By Edmond Gary  

Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences, Vol. 45, Iss. 3, 2013-09 ,pp. : 248-262

Taylor & Francis Ltd

Access to resources Recommend Favorite

Vascular rupture—a rare lethal complication of neurofibromatosis v. Recklinghausen

By  

Forensic Science, Medicine, and Pathology, Vol. 3, Iss. 3, 2007-09 ,pp. : 206-209

Humana Press, Inc

Access to resources Recommend Favorite