Expert witness bias and justice in the Criminalistics System

Abstract

The validity of the expert report is threatened by biases of multifactorial origin, which extend beyond the individual cognitive framework to become embedded in organizational dynamics and the pressures of the investigative context. This article aims to analyze how cognitive, organizational, and contextual approaches can offer an explanation for this problem and propose a set of transformations to mitigate its effects within the Cuban judicial system. Through an integrative theoretical review of specialized literature and a strategic analysis, the study reveals that the praxis of expert evidence within the national Criminalistics Technical System may be compromised. The findings demonstrate that the interactions between the natural limitations of human thought, the influence of institutional structures, and the situational pressures of an investigation can contribute to the generation of biases such as confirmation bias, anchoring, and deference to authority. Mitigation, from both an ethical and legal standpoint, requires combining organizational reforms, the strict implementation of blind analysis protocols, independent peer review, and the mandatory incorporation of metacognition into the professional training of system operators. The study advocates for the institutionalization of cognitive humility to enhance the validity, objectivity, and legal soundness of judicial outcomes.