Summary of El papel del perito en el Sistema de Justicia Penal Acusatorio

00:00:00 - 00:50:00

The role of experts or "peritos" in the Mexican justice system is discussed in this video. Accreditation, reliability, and credibility in their area of expertise are necessary, as well as the use of scientific methods and techniques recognized by the national and international forensic science community. The speaker stresses that peritos play a crucial role in the evaluation and interpretation of scientific evidence. The video also covers related topics such as the need for continuous training and clear profiles for experts, certification for forensic experts, the importance of reformation of the juridical-pericial framework, accreditation and certification for forensic labs and tools, and the importance of following standardized methodologies and protocols. The speaker emphasizes the need for quality and specialized education, a community of scientists with standardized and nationally/internationally recognized research methodologies, and a respect for the human beings involved in criminal investigations.

• 00:00:00 In this section, the speaker explains who peritos are and their role in the Mexican criminal justice system. Before the reform of 2008, peritos were considered experts in any science, technical field, art, or industry without specific requirements. However, after the reform, peritos must have accreditation, reliability, and credibility in their specific area, and in some cases, they must have a degree or specialization related to the area in which they will provide expert testimony. The speaker emphasizes that peritos play a crucial part in the criminal justice system, especially in the evaluation and interpretation of scientific evidence.
• 00:05:00 In this section, the role of a perito, or expert witness, in the new penal justice system is discussed. It is important that a perito have reliable and specific education and accreditation in their area of expertise. The use of scientific methods and techniques recognized by the national and international forensic science community is necessary to lend credibility to their testimony in court. However, accreditation and scientific methods alone are not enough, as the perito must also demonstrate credibility and mastery under questioning in a trial setting. The use of various methods of investigation may also be required, and the perito must be able to convincingly justify their research to demonstrate their expertise.
• 00:10:00 In this section, the role of both official and private experts in the Acusatory Penal Justice system is discussed. While official experts work within the interdisciplinary group of the public ministry, private experts are often hired by the defense to support a specific case. However, there is a concern about inequality between the parties, as the public ministry may not be experienced in dealing with private experts during cross-examination, leading to an unbalanced questioning process. It is suggested that the public ministry should avoid open-ended questions when questioning private experts and focus on ensuring a fair and just trial for all parties involved. Additionally, the importance of accreditation for experts is discussed, which includes having certifications and actively seeking to stay up-to-date on scientific advancements in their field.
• 00:15:00 In this section, the speaker discusses the issue of certification for forensic experts in Mexico. There are currently 20-23 specializations for forensic experts, but not all of these require certification. There are only four certifications available for forensic experts: preservation and protection of the crime scene, ground transportation, forensic medicine, and graphology. These certifications are regulated, and the National Council of Technical Standards is responsible for awarding them. However, not all areas require certification, and some experts may rely on a master's degree in forensic science or criminalistics to prove their expertise. The creation of new specializations by institutions such as the National Institute of Criminal Sciences is seen as a way to address this issue.
• 00:20:00 In this section, the need for continuous training of experts and the importance of methodological, knowledge theory, and scientific training in evidence-based justification is discussed. Although there are approximately 23 specific areas of expertise for experts in criminal investigations, sometimes criminalists must cover the tasks related to other areas since there may be a shortage of personnel. Therefore, the need to define clear profiles for experts and their specific roles in investigations is emphasized, clarifying that a police officer should not consider themselves a forensic expert. There is a need to position forensic science and criminalistics as respectable specialties requiring appropriate training and expertise.
• 00:25:00 In this section, the role of experts or "peritos" in the penal justice system is discussed. Specifically, the importance of having specialized knowledge and a degree in police investigation to properly process and preserve evidence is emphasized. The responsibility of the chain of custody is shared throughout the entire investigative process, with different individuals and departments taking on various responsibilities. In terms of the expert's involvement, they primarily contribute to the investigation phase, where they provide written reports for the case file. Later on, during the trial phase, they may participate in a cross-examination to prove the validity of their investigation and conclusions. The timeframe for producing reports depends on the individual case, but generally, there is a constitutional deadline that must be met by the expert.
• 00:30:00 In this section, the importance of reforming the juridical-pericial (forensic) framework to improve the role of the experts is discussed. There are still ambiguities in the classifications of technical experts, which leads to the establishment of different specialties. The expert's training, salary, and rights should be similar to those of a professional. To make this happen, the legal framework should be reformed, and universities and public institutions should create and advertise specific job openings for experts. The Control and Confidence exams are vital to entering this profession, and there are different levels of experts, from professionals to chiefs, depending on their years of experience, academic degrees, and job performance. In addition to expertise and experience, the use of technology is crucial in the work of the expert, but the scarcity of resources and the high cost of technology often hinder the work of experts in labs and service centers across the country.
• 00:35:00 In this section, the importance of accreditation and certification for forensic labs and tools is discussed. In Mexico, less than 30% of labs are accredited, which can lead to the invalidation of evidence in court if the tools used are not certified. The role of technology and the need for proper training and understanding of the tools by the expert is emphasized. The discussion also touches on the relationship between different institutions and the possibility of requesting help from others with more advanced technology. The importance of asking objective questions regarding the reliability and validity of the expert's investigation and the degree of error in the discipline is highlighted for defense lawyers in their questioning of the expert in court. The "3 of 3" approach is suggested, where defense lawyers ask about the chain of custody, certification and validation of the tools and the degree of error in the discipline.
• 00:40:00 In this section, the speaker discusses the role of the expert witness in the Acusatory Penal Justice System, focusing on the importance of following standardized methodologies and protocols. They suggest that it is important for lawyers to talk to their expert witness about the objective validity of their methodology and for judges to carefully evaluate the scientific evidence presented. One major issue with the system is that different disciplines within the forensic sciences use different methods, leading to confusion and difficulty in evaluating evidence. Additionally, the concept of the "scientific community" is not well-defined in Mexico, leading to questions about how to determine the validity of a particular technique or method. Despite these challenges, the speaker believes that continued work on standardizing methodologies and educating legal professionals and the public about the scientific or technical issues involved will help move the system towards success.
• 00:45:00 In this section, the speaker discusses the importance of accreditation and professional preparation in the new criminal justice system. Some experts have found success in the new system because they have prepared and trained well to master the new requirements. However, those who have not been certified and do not have professional training have naturally struggled. The shift to the new system has made it difficult for some workers as they struggle with changing their mindset to fit the new requirements. The speaker mentions several of the major challenges facing the function of experts in the new criminal justice system, including the need for new epistemological frameworks, professional methodologies, and a new approach to criminalistics based on science, rather than authority-based argumentation.
• 00:50:00 In this section, the speaker discusses the need for quality and specialized education for forensic experts. They suggest that a national program of certified postgraduate studies, such as the PNPC program from CONACYT, should be required for those seeking to specialize in a particular area. They also highlight the importance of a community of scientists with standardized and nationally/internationally recognized research methodologies, values of transparency, honesty, and equality, and a respect for the human beings involved in criminal investigations. The speaker emphasizes the need for a reform of criminalistics in Mexico that is both epistemological and institutional, and that is based on values of service and the pursuit of truth rather than personal gain.