Romero_Trial_Transcript_8_25_04_53_2

8-25-04 Trial Transcript
2 And legal conclusions include drawing inferences from fact to
3 reach conclusions as to, for instance, criminal responsibility
4 for assassination, committing the crime of murder. Others
5 come to mind.
6 And so I don't know yet. In other words, a witness
7 can discuss what is observed, what is known, what, if we use
8 pattern and practice as a term, what social mores, customs,
9 what military practices are at any given time, but then to
10 draw, if you will, the inferences that normally the trier of
11 fact does, the decision maker, that is something an expert
12 cannot do.
13 For instance, an expert can't get on the witness
14 stand, to use the most local example, and say, "By driving his
15 car through the intersection and hitting the plaintiff's car,
16 the defendant is liable for this action," and therefore,
17 responsible for damages. That's a legal conclusion.
18 MR. Van AELSTYN: Actually, your Honor. I apologize
19 if I was not sufficiently clear on that. We certainly respect
20 here that the Professor is not the trier of fact and will not
21 be drawing legal conclusions.
22 Nonetheless, it's a related issue, and the related
23 issue is, given the nature of her field of expertise in El
24 Salvador, in particular, it becomes necessary, in her academic
25 work to draw conclusions with regard to who is killing whom.
KARL - D
267
1 It is the nature of the work, unfortunately, that is
2 at issue in El Salvador at that time. Those are not legal
3 conclusions, but they are conclusions that she reaches as an
4 academic in her work reviewing the kinds of evidence that the
Page 75