Erratum to "The role of the expert, of the technical consultant and of the consultant for the defensive investigations in the criminal trial" [Forensic Sci Int. 146(2004) S219-S220].

The problem of the relations between science and law represents always a very interesting source for the doctrine and the jurisprudence. The contribution of the ‘‘experts’’ in the courtrooms became always more than once recurrent and sometime essential to the resolution of complicated judicial cases. Hence it follows the necessity to define exactly the role and the functions of the different experts that intervene in the proceeding and in the process, now marked no more by the contribution of traditional sciences but by knowledges always more elaborated and subject to continue evolutions upon which often the same scientific community is divided. A convenient formation as well as a certified evaluation of the ‘‘experts’’ are necessary to warrant that the proceeding and the process take place assuring the formation of the scientific evidence in the ‘‘qualified’’ debate of the parts, in front of a third party and impartial judge, but especially through the correct contribution of ‘‘experts’’ of proven capability, subjects to continue formation and upgrade, certification of quality, as well as to a rigorous and necessary system of deontological laws with the possibility of strict disciplinary measures. The requirement appears again more necessary as far as is concerned with the defensive investigations field, where is not returnable the exact definition of the tasks and of the essential qualifications of professional-