TESTIMONIAL ADMISSIBILITY OF EXPERT WITNESS 3
The adoption of the Daubert test in 1993 resulted in the transformation of how the judges
in the court of law uses scientific testimony to pass their verdicts against cases. The Daubert
standard handles acceptability of scientific through the governance of Daubert trilogy (Faigman,
2012). Presently, numerous states in the US have adopted the Daubert test, hence portraying its
authenticity and credibility.
Similarities of the Daubert standard and Frye test
Both the Daubert standard and Frye test are significant in making relevant decision
concerning cases in the court of law. They jointly rely on scientific testimony of experts in
validating court verdict (Faigman, Monahan, & Slobogin, 2014). Both the Daubert and Frye
standards assist judges in handling challenges associated with misuse and falsification of expert
testimony, which has become a menace the contemporary society.
Distinctions of Frye test and Daubert standard
First, the courts of law in U.S have implemented the Frye standards from 1923 to validate
expert testimony regarding scientific approach. However, in 1993, the Daubert standard
superseded the Frye test. Second, the Frye standard emphasizes on scientific knowledge, while
the Daubert test applies or relates to both specialize and technical knowledge (Faigman,
Monahan, & Slobogin, 2014). Finally, a substantial number of states in America implement the
Frye standard in legal proceedings. Contrarily, numerous states in different parts of the world
implement the Daubert standard in validating expert testimony in court of law.
Conclusion
This paper compares and contrasts the Frye and Daubert standards in validating expert
testimony. Validation of expert witness testimony plays a substantial role in averting misuse and
falsification of scientific evidence. The adoption of the Frye and Daubert standards assist judges
