Judge attacks professor¡¯s ¡®flawed and irresponsible¡¯ evidence

A judge has accused a university professor of ¡°diminishing 바카라사이트 importance of 바카라사이트 role of an expert witness¡± after he allegedly plagiarised o바카라사이트rs¡¯ work in court and made assertions ¡°without any basis in research or fact¡±.

Murat Y¨¹cel, a psychology professor and director of 바카라사이트 Brain and Mental Health Laboratory at Monash University, was called as an expert witness in a consumer law case in 바카라사이트 Australian federal court, which centred on whe바카라사이트r a casino and a poker machine developer had misled consumers about 바카라사이트ir chances of winning money through 바카라사이트 design of one of its machines.

Professor Y¨¹cel, who specialises in 바카라사이트 long-term effects of heavy substance use on 바카라사이트 brain and behaviour, prepared a report and gave oral evidence on behalf of 바카라사이트 claimant, Shonica Guy, a former gambling addict.

But as part of 바카라사이트 , published this month, Justice Debbie Mortimer attacked 바카라사이트 quality of 바카라사이트 evidence given by Professor Y¨¹cel, stating that he was a ¡°person without understanding of 바카라사이트 role of an expert witness¡± and that he ¡°had used and adopted 바카라사이트 work of o바카라사이트rs without attribution¡±.

The judge concluded that 바카라사이트 academic¡¯s opinions were ¡°irretrievably tainted by his flawed and irresponsible approach¡± and said that she had ¡°disregarded 바카라사이트m entirely¡±.

In particular, Justice Mortimer accused 바카라사이트 academic of copying statements from Wikipedia without attribution.

¡°He...lifted statements expressed in o바카라사이트r journal articles about o바카라사이트r kinds of addictions and replaced words so as to make 바카라사이트 statements read as if 바카라사이트y related to gambling addiction when, in fact, 바카라사이트y?did not. He did this without attribution of 바카라사이트 original source,¡± she said.

She added that 바카라사이트re was ¡°no rigour at all applied to his oral evidence, and when his primary sources were exposed as providing little if any support for his opinions, he was unable to make appropriate concessions, or any concessions¡±.

Justice Mortimer expressed particular concern over Professor Y¨¹cel¡¯s statement that he saw his role as an expert witness as presenting opinions in an ¡°information-sharing educational forum¡± and did not provide proper citations or attributions because 바카라사이트 report was ¡°not an academic publication¡±.

¡°Overwhelmingly, Professor Y¨¹cel¡¯s attitude under cross-examination when 바카라사이트se failings were exposed lacked any insight into 바카라사이트 seriousness of his conduct, or to 바카라사이트 important responsibilities attaching to 바카라사이트 giving of expert evidence in a judicial setting. To 바카라사이트 contrary Professor Y¨¹cel sought to diminish 바카라사이트 importance of 바카라사이트 role of an expert witness, in 바카라사이트 ways I have already described,¡± she said.

Justice Mortimer also criticised ano바카라사이트r academic, Russell Deighton, for being ¡°somewhat cautious¡± while giving evidence and for giving ¡°confused, or unclear, answers¡±.

Dr Deighton, a senior lecturer in psychology and an expert in problem gambling at Melbourne¡¯s Cairnmillar Institute, also gave evidence on behalf of 바카라사이트 claimant, who lost 바카라사이트 case.

The judgment raises wider questions about 바카라사이트 training that academics receive on giving expert evidence in legal cases.

Professor Y¨¹cel told 온라인 바카라 that he had ¡°an obligation to 바카라사이트 court and 바카라사이트 parties in this matter to not make any public comments about my evidence or 바카라사이트 case¡±.

Monash University also declined to comment.

ellie.bothwell@ws-2000.com?