Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence permits expert witnesses to offer opinion testimony when the proposed testimony will "assist the trier of fact
to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue.
The Court has dispelled some of the confusion surrounding the admissibility of expert testimony, explaining some of the characteristics of evidence that would be helpful to the trier of fact
The required judicial inquiry under Rule 702 is whether the testimony will "assist the trier of fact
," which is commonly known as the "helpfulness" requirement.
Rule 702, which governs the admissibility of expert testimony, provides that "if scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact
to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise.
Prosecutors contended that the expert testimony was admissible under Federal Rules of Evidence 402 and 702 because it was highly relevant to the charges against Valentini and constituted specialized knowledge that would assist the trier of fact
to understand the evidence or determine a fact in issue.
Their filing stated: "Given Plaintiff's conduct in seeking and obtaining a restraining order that required Rob to stay away from Plaintiff and her workplace, no trier of fact
could possibly find that it was reasonably probable that a second season of Rob & Chyna would have been picked up and filmed.
This court, as a trier of fact
, is simply not firmly convinced of defendant's guilt," Judge Wilson ruled.
The case law of international tribunals defines the term 'expert' as 'a person whom by virtue of some specialized knowledge, skill or training, can assist the trier of fact
to understand or determine an issue in dispute.
Furthermore, the determination of a trier of fact
as to issues of credibility is given substantial deference, as a trial court's opportunity to observe and evaluate the testimony and demeanor of the witnesses affords it a better perspective from which to assess their credibility (see Vizzari v State of New York, 184 AD2d 564 ; Kincade v Kincade, 178 AD2d 510, 511 ).
Monahan further acknowledged that there was enough evidence for a trier of fact
to find him guilty of the charges.
In evaluating the request for an adverse inference sanction, the district court explained that the plaintiff "must demonstrate: (1) that the party having control over the evidence had an obligation to preserve it at the time it was destroyed; (2) that the records were destroyed with a culpable state of mind; and (3) that the destroyed evidence was relevant to the party's claim or defense such that a reasonable trier of fact
could find that it would support that claim or defense.
If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact
in understanding the evidence or in determining a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify about it in the form of an opinion or otherwise, if: