Daubert Institute  for

Forensic Psychology , Inc.

​"Certitude is not the test of certainty, we have been cocksure of many things that were not so."

             - Oliver Wendall Holmes, Jr. 

John F. Fielder, Ph.D.

"Facts are stubborn things; and no matter what be our wishes, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."

                  - John Adams on occasion of the Boston Massacre Trial

Type your paragraph here.

The Mayflower Society (pending)

​​​  The gold standard for scientific evidence set unanimously by the US Supreme Court in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. in 1993 and embodied in Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence is changing forever how attorneys and the courts use and challenge psychological and psychiatric testimony

   The Supreme Court elaborated on Daubert in what have been called its progeny,  General Electric v. Joiner, United States v. Scheffer, Kumho Tire v. Carmichael, and Weisgram v. Marley Co. Rule 702 was amended on 01.01.2024  and states that a witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if the proponent demonstrates to the court that it is more likely than not that:(a) the expert's scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue;
(b) the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data;
(c) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and
(d) the expert's opinion reflects a reliable application of the principles and methods to the facts of the case.

​
   Dr. John Fielder is an expert in how Daubert applies to psychological and psychiatric testimony and has written ten articles for prominent legal publications on the subject. He has conducted numerous seminars for law firms, the California Department of Justice and Placer County Bar Association on the how Daubert shifts the focus of discovery from expert qualifications to include the scientific foundation of their testimony.

   He is highly qualified based on education, training and experience and he has served as a percipient expert, expert witness, consultant expert and rebuttal expert in hundreds of civil, criminal and courts-martial cases throughout the United States. He strongly advocates the use of rebuttal experts to detail the lack of a reliable foundation in almost all psychiatric and psychological causation opinions.

​

    Current and recent cases, among others, include, Defense expert in M.D., RN & MFT licensing defense cases; Plaintiff expert - personal injury case; Defense expert - personal injury case; Defense expert - tenant/landlord dispute in an emotional support animal case; Defense expert - Court-Martial defense expert in a sexual assault and battery case; Plaintiff expert in a sexual abuse case against a diocese. Court-Martial defense expert in a sexual molestation of children case; Defense rebuttal expert in two plaintiff and three plaintiff sexual harassment cases; Plaintiff expert in a wrongful termination case and, Defense expert in  suicide and attempted suicide cases. Defense Expert - Racial discrimination case.  Also, many competency and capacity evaluations.