Response to “A rose by any other name” published in the 2014 July edition of the Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine

Abstract

Dear Sir,

We are grateful for the opportunity to reply to the comments made by Dr Davis.

Our paper was developed in response to the common misunderstanding among forensic physicians of the roles of witnesses in the criminal courts and following reflection on the decision in Jones v Kaney. We indeed sympathise with Dr Davis' view that doctors who the courts recognise as “forensic physicians” should already have “prior knowledge and understanding of most of the information” outlined in our article.