Chicago-Kent Law Review Volume 8 Issue 3 Article 3 June 1930 Expert Evidence in Ballistics William McGee James Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/cklawreview Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation William M. James, Expert Evidence in Ballistics, 8 Chi.-Kent L. Rev. 33 (1930). Available at: https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/cklawreview/vol8/iss3/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarly Commons @ IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Chicago-Kent Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarly Commons @ IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. For more information, please contact
[email protected],
[email protected]. EXPERT EVIDENCE IN BALLISTICS WILLIAM MCGEE JAMES* Inventions and inovations of late years have greatly affected the home, the factory, and the store. Scientists and inventors have devoted most of their efforts toward improving living and working conditions and heretofore have neglected the courts and the administration of jus- tice. Through the efforts of the press and various indi- viduals who have become interested in the administration of justice, the attention of science has been recently di- rected to the detection and prosecution of criminals. As a consequence, efforts have been made to use the phono- graph, the moving picture machine, the lie-detector and other inventions and sciences, not the least important of which is the science of ballistics. This article is confined to what is now commonly referred to as the science of ballistics. It is not the author's intention to prove that the testimony of a ballistic expert should or should not be admitted in the trial of a criminal case, but rather to discuss the more important legal questions resulting from the use of this comparatively new science.