For more information please

Contact Us

Case Studies


If the Scooter Libby-Valerie Plame-CIA headline still stimulates a glimmer of interest, the following case review refines and dresses up that interest with important case law and recent psychological research.

McAuliff, Bradley B. D. (2009) Judging the validity of psychological science from the bench: A case In point. Journal of Forensic Psychology and Practice, 9 (4), 310-320.

Dr. Bradely McAuliff is a lawyer and a psychologist who is well situated to reflect on the challenges involving the relationship between the psychological model and the legal model. In this particular article, McAuliff reviews the Legacy of the Daubert trilogy and the demands these legal decisions place upon not only proferred expert psychological evidence but also upon the demands on the judges who must act as the gatekeepers.

In the Case Report, McAuliff briefly reviewed both recent case law regarding admissibility decisions as well as recent empirical research on how judges evaluate the validity of psychological science. Next, the basic facts and judge’s ruling from United States v. Libby (2006) are presented to illustrate how a variety of issues may arise when judges evaluate the admissibility of psychological science in court.