Medical Evidence

Testimony given by physicians or surgeons in their professional capacity as experts, or derived from the statements of writers of medical or surgical works. This kind of evidence was first recognized by Charles V. of Germany, and incorporated in the "Caroline Code," framed at Ratisbon in 1532, wherein it was ordained that the opinion of medical men — at first surgeons only — should be received in cases of death by violent or unnatural means, when suspicion existed of a criminal agency. The publication of this code encouraged the members of the medical profession to renewed activity, tending greatly to advance their sciences and the cause of justice generally. Many books soon appeared on the subject of medical jurisprudence, and the importance of medical evidence was more fully understood. Elwell, Malprac. 285.

Testimony given by physicians or surgeons in their professional capacity as experts, or derived from the statements of writers of medical' or surgical works. Tbis kind of evidence was first recognized by Charles V. of Germany, and Incorporated in the “Caroline Code,” framed at Ratisbon in 1632, wherein it was ordained that the opinion of medical men — at first surgeons only— should be received In cases of death by violent or unnatural means, when suspicion existed of a criminal agency. The publication of this code encouraged the members of the medical profession to renewed activity, tending greatly to advance their science and the cause of Justice generally. Many books soon appeared on the subject of medical jurisprudence, and the importance of medical evidence was more fully understood. Elwell, Malp. & Med. Ev. 285. The evidence of the medical witness is strictly that of an expert; Elwell, Malp. & Med. Ev. 275; 1 Phlll. Ev. 780; 1 Whart. Ev. § 441. In the case of Com. v. Rogers, 7 Mete. (Mass.) 605, 41 Am. Dec. 458, Shaw, C, J., presiding, the court held that the proper question to be put to the professional witness was: “If the symptoms and indications testified to by other witnesses are proved, and if the jury are satisfied of the truth of them, whether in bis [the witness’s] opinion the party was insane, and what the nature and character of that insanity; and what state did they indicate, and what he would expect would be the conduct of such a person in any supposed circumstance." Under this ruling the medical witness passes upon the condition of the person whose condition is at issue. To do it correctly he must hear all the evidence that the jury hears; he must judge as to the relevance of the evidence of others, and make an application of the facts that legally and properly bear upon the case to It, and reject all others; in short, be is judge and jury in the case. Since the trial of Rogers, a different rule has been adopted by the courts in Massachusetts. In the case of the United States v. Mc Glue, reported in 1 Curt. 1, Fed. Cas. No. 15,679, Mr. Justice Curtis instructed the jury that medical experts “were not allowed to give opinions in the case." See Experts; Htpotheticai. Question;

Evidence furnished by medical men, testifying in their professional capacity as experts, or by standard treatises on medicine or surgery.

Defined under Medical in Black's Law Dictionary.

Evidence furnished by medical men, testifying in their professional capacity as experts, or by standard treatises on medicine or surgery,