Medicolegal Update
(Dr Sudhir Gupta,
Additional Prof, Forensic Medicine & Toxicology, AIIMS)
One paragraph or even one part of a
paragraph may be all that is necessary to substantiate the point a doctor wants
to make in a court room. Reading the remainder of the document, even if it
establishes a context for the evidence, is unnecessary and time consuming. The
document must potentially be available to any debater researching the topic or
lawyer/interested party of cross examination side.
- The portion of a document read as evidence cannot be
taken out of context. When a document is cut in a manner which lends the
quoted passage a meaning other than what would be derived from a more
complete reading, you are misrepresenting the document. This does not
mean, however, that you are responsible for drawing the same conclusions
from information as the author of the document.
- Drawing a contrary conclusion from passages accurately
interpreted does not constitute misrepresentation. The fact that the
author of the document reached a different conclusion from the information
argues – perhaps persuasively – against your conclusion. However, you have
not misused the evidence.
- Read the used evidence literature verbatim in the court
of law. Documents must be presented in the words of the author. When you
paraphrase evidence, you argue in a circle. A document obviously will seem
to support your point if you are allowed to read into the record only what
you think it says.
- The advent of the Internet has created a new form of
publication – electronic documents like this emedinews. Electronic
documents are accepted as published if they are accessible by the general
public. Thus, electronic files to which other debaters would be denied
access are not published. However, files and documents which other
debaters may access, even if they have no subscribe to a commercial
service to do so, satisfy the publication rule.
No comments:
Post a Comment