HOW TO OBTAIN THE EXPERT.
Send a check or money order for $160.00 to
Longbranch Research Associates
1430 Valmont Drive
Hendersonville, NC 28791
We will ship you the hard-cover book, with dust jacket, by media mail—no additional charge. We will wait two days after depositing your remittance, to be sure it clears. We do not have the resources to chase down false orders.
In theory, experts are brought to court to shed light on areas in which lay knowledge is lacking. One such area is statistical analysis,
the use of which has soared since the 1960s. Stephan Michelson was there, being the first to use (and create software for) multiple-pools analytic
techniques, one of the first to use survival analysis as a tool for analyzing promotion, and possibly the first to enter a regression analysis as
evidence in a federal district court. This is not a technical book, however. Nor is it a book of war stories. At the heart of this book lies the
realization that courts are not organized to receive, comprehend, or utilize honest analyses from experts. This is not news to judges, who
understand what experts are; who so expect experts to be corrupt that they are unable to discern when one is not. What is news to judges, in
this book, is what to do about it. Michelson excoriates so-called experts for their biased and often incompetent charades. He establishes their
lack of skill, the lack of expertise among “experts,” not as the point of the book, but as its premise. He then analyzes the forces operating on
the system, finding—no surprise—that “truth” is not only not rewarded, but is structurally excluded. He goes on to propose a novel approach
to the gatekeeping function imposed on judges by the federal rules and the 1993 Daubert Supreme Court decision (and its successors). This book is written
for professionals, for social scientists and statisticians, attorneys and judges. It is not an easy read. Hundreds of cases, and hundreds of professional
journal and law review articles, are discussed and used to derive or demonstrate principles important to the evaluation of experts. The grist for this
mill includes history, theory, and practice. Ultimately, this book is meant to be more than a contribution to the discussion of “science” in court: It
is the platform from which all future work in this field will start.