Trials of a Forensic Psychologist: A Casebook

Ewing's writing is excellent. Makes the forensic side of psychology and law easy to understand. Very practical.

Great Book. I recommend it to forensic psychology students or criminology students.

I'm only through the second chapter, but this has been an awesome read. I bought it for grad school, and I have to say, anyone looking for a "Criminal Minds" type book will be disappointed. However, if you want a true to life "you don't win them all" type of learning experience, this is perfect.

I was required to purchase this for a graduate class in Forensic Psychology. It is a very interesting read even for people who are not well-versed or even interested in the subject. Well worth the money.

excellent

Charles Patrick Ewing's new book, "Tales of a Forensic Scientist" is another treat. Ewing's prose is engaging and witty - written in plain English but in no way is it dummy-downed.Ewing uses 10 cases in which he was called as an expert witness to illustrate both the benefits and the limits of expert testimony. Indeed, in every case in which he testified as an expert for the defense, the defense was unsuccessful at trial. His purpose in using some of these "losing cases," was not to show that he is unsuccessful as an expert witness. To the contrary, though his testimony had not achieved results at trial, it had collateral benefits in the sentences in the cases of Charlene Brundidge, Judith Neeley and (possibly) Felicia Morgan.As a lawyer and a forensic psychologist, Ewing aptly describes the differing purposes between the two. A lawyer is an advocate while a forensic psychologist is (supposed to be) a neutral and detached professional. Ewing's bias is decidedly against the expert witness" who acts as advocate (the hired gun). Ewing minces no words in expressing his disdain for the "hired gun." For Ewing, the "hired gun" does a disservice to whatever field he may be testifying. This is not Ewing's first foray into the criticism of the "hired gun ( Insanity: Murder, Madness, and the Law ). The words of W.B. Yeats come to mind, "But was there ever dog that praised his fleas?"According to Ewing, too much significance is attached to the testimony of the expert witness. Even when the expert (such as Ewing) renders a dispassionate reasoned opinion, he can still lose the "battle of the experts" to a hack hired gun.

I've dabbled with the thought of changing careers into forensic psychology. This book was very entertaining an easy to read and understand. Ultimately it opened my eyes to how much or little influence psychological expert testimony has on the jury. Food for thought, but still a good read.

Ewing, a Distinguished Service Professor at the State University of New York's law school in Buffalo, employs the same case study format from  Minds on Trial: Great Cases in Law and Psychology , this time using only cases in which he has been involved over his 30-year career as an expert witness. The book is well written and packed with details and lengthy segments of trial transcripts from ten riveting, high-profile cases, making it ideal for use as a teaching tool for students of mental health law or the social sciences.My lengthier review, in California Lawyer magazine, is online at tiny.cc/Ewing.