{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020480854853072127, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.175824175824176, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Pre-recorded expert evidence in intimate partner violence cases

ABSTRACT This article makes a case for pre-recorded, modularized expert evidence as a way to improve access to justice in some intimate partner violence (IPV) cases. Knowledge about the effects and dynamics of IPV regularly plays an important role in criminal trials. This knowledge is often beyond the ken of the factfinder and thus can provide important context for the case facts. It may also assist in disabusing misconceptions surrounding IPV. Despite the potential value of this knowledge, several rules of evidence and the general nature of the Anglo-American trial process make it difficult to tender such evidence. For instance, trials prefer live testimony of expert witnesses over other means of conveying exogenous knowledge. These limitations place impecunious parties in regional areas at a disadvantage because they may struggle to find qualified experts. As a result, cross-examined pre-recorded modules about IPV (eg, factors that prevent individuals from leaving abusive relationships, IPV as coercive control) may be helpful in some cases.