Unseemly conduct

Last Thursday we made a statement following the collapse of the Carbon Credit Fraud trial. But another case hit the headlines earlier that week which highlights the imperative that an Expert Witness in whatever discipline they operate must be seen to be impartial and unbiased.

Professor Stephen Harris one of Britain’s leading authorities on foxes and a longstanding opponent of hunting, was excluded from the trial of Mick Wills, a huntsman with the Grafton after he was spotted kissing a prosecution witness.  Judge Daber in Wellingborough Magistrates Court said: -

“…If a relationship exists between a proposed Expert and the party calling that Expert which a reasonable observer might think is evidence of bias, then he must be excluded on the grounds of public policy.  Justice must be seen to be done.  The allegation of bias specific to this particular case is something in my view the Court cannot ignore.  A reasonable observer would consider him to be partisan however, unbiased he may be, this Court must exclude Professor Harris’s evidence”.

Professor Harris is a former Professor of Environmental Sciences at the University of Bristol and has been employed by the CPS previously to give evidence on behalf of the prosecution, despite earlier questions being raised over his independence.  In December 2015, a private prosecution brought by the Legal Against Cruel Sports collapsed after Professor Harris failed to inform the Court about his friendship with Paul Tilsley BLACS Head of Investigation and other connections to the group.

It is imperative that an Expert is not only unbiased and impartial, but is seen to be same and conducts himself accordingly.