“Uhh, why would a judge have a say in who anyone calls as an expert witness? This is wrong. The jury can decide what they think of any witness during deliberations.”
I disagree. Expert witnesses are necessary on some cases, and this case is one of them. The judge must rule on any Daubert challenge (i.e., an expert witness must be qualified to render his or her opinion; it is intended to prevent the trial from turning into a mockery).
“The judge must rule on any Daubert challenge (i.e., an expert witness must be qualified to render his or her opinion; it is intended to prevent the trial from turning into a mockery).”
So, the Judge ruling the person is an expert prevents the Prosecutor from having the expert witness testimony excluded from the trial?
Is this correct thinking?