Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 5, No. 1 1988 Page 92
Make Special Use of Expert Witnesses
In planning a trial strategy, attorneys should consider and select among the multiple possible
uses of psychologists, psychiatrists, anthropologists, and sociologists as expert witnesses.
Testimony by social and behavioral scientists who have done primary research on a cult, or
clinicians who have treated former cult members and their families, can be invaluable in providing
information on the patterns of child-raising within the cult.
If such experts testify in court, caution them to concentrate on facts about the social
organization, culture, and interpersonal dynamics in the group and about the psychological
consequences of these factors. Avoid the battle of theories that is subject to First Amendment
protection and which creates a tangle of ideologies while raising issues of admissibility under the
Frye test. As first enunciated in the case of Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (CADC 1923), the
rule holds that ―in admitting expert testimony deduced from a well-recognized scientific principle
or discovery, the thing from which the deduction is made must be sufficiently established to have
gained general acceptance in the particular field in which it belongs.‖ The test can be used to
exclude expert testimony in the behavioral and social sciences where the nature of academic
debate often makes it impossible to meet the ―general acceptance‖ standard. But do elicit
sufficient ethnographic detail to assist the clinical experts in giving their testimony. Such experts
may also be helpful out of court in providing ethnographic and theoretical information to clinical
experts. The body of scientific literature has swelled to substantial proportions, and any attorney
litigating cult cases is well advised to become familiar with some of this material whether or not
its authors are to testify as expert witnesses.
The use of clinical experts must, almost necessarily, be more extensive than in a typical
matrimonial action. The usual psychiatric or psychological evaluative consultation is done in the
experts office and typically consists of interviews with the parents and children and observations
of parent-child interaction.
In a cult-related case this is simply not enough. The inquiry must not end with the question of
whether the parent-child relationship is good or bad because much of the psychologically
destructive quality of life in a cult comes from the mental and psychological control exercised by
the cult leadership. The expert evaluation must include other issues such as: 1) who controls and
directs the parent's functioning and decision-making 2) who, other than the parent, disciplines
and cares for the child 3) how much time do parents spend with their children and what is the
nature of the interaction 4) who, other than the parents, makes decisions about the child's
upbringing and education, and what is the basis for these decisions.
Ideally, the expert witness should have a substantial Opportunity to observe the parent-child
interaction in ethnographic context (at home in the cult interacting with cult leaders and other
cult members who are significant adults in the child's life). Alternatively, the expert should have
the opportunity to testify about the effects of the cult's practices as developed through the
testimony of others, through information provided by research-oriented experts, or through their
scholarly works.
Enlist the Help and Support of Other Ex-Members
Individuals who had left the Sullivanians relatively recently formed a supportive, informal ―re-
entry‖ network of friends and associates who were in close and frequent contact with one
another. The same is true for former members of many other groups.
The people in this network provided invaluable assistance to both the litigators and the litigants.
They testified as witnesses. They provided volunteer clerical services (helping, in a small way, to
minimize the inordinate financial discrepancies between the wealth of the cult and the budgets of
the independent parties). And, perhaps most importantly, they provided emotional and practical
support to the ex-member parent parties during the long ordeal of litigation which, for the
Make Special Use of Expert Witnesses
In planning a trial strategy, attorneys should consider and select among the multiple possible
uses of psychologists, psychiatrists, anthropologists, and sociologists as expert witnesses.
Testimony by social and behavioral scientists who have done primary research on a cult, or
clinicians who have treated former cult members and their families, can be invaluable in providing
information on the patterns of child-raising within the cult.
If such experts testify in court, caution them to concentrate on facts about the social
organization, culture, and interpersonal dynamics in the group and about the psychological
consequences of these factors. Avoid the battle of theories that is subject to First Amendment
protection and which creates a tangle of ideologies while raising issues of admissibility under the
Frye test. As first enunciated in the case of Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (CADC 1923), the
rule holds that ―in admitting expert testimony deduced from a well-recognized scientific principle
or discovery, the thing from which the deduction is made must be sufficiently established to have
gained general acceptance in the particular field in which it belongs.‖ The test can be used to
exclude expert testimony in the behavioral and social sciences where the nature of academic
debate often makes it impossible to meet the ―general acceptance‖ standard. But do elicit
sufficient ethnographic detail to assist the clinical experts in giving their testimony. Such experts
may also be helpful out of court in providing ethnographic and theoretical information to clinical
experts. The body of scientific literature has swelled to substantial proportions, and any attorney
litigating cult cases is well advised to become familiar with some of this material whether or not
its authors are to testify as expert witnesses.
The use of clinical experts must, almost necessarily, be more extensive than in a typical
matrimonial action. The usual psychiatric or psychological evaluative consultation is done in the
experts office and typically consists of interviews with the parents and children and observations
of parent-child interaction.
In a cult-related case this is simply not enough. The inquiry must not end with the question of
whether the parent-child relationship is good or bad because much of the psychologically
destructive quality of life in a cult comes from the mental and psychological control exercised by
the cult leadership. The expert evaluation must include other issues such as: 1) who controls and
directs the parent's functioning and decision-making 2) who, other than the parent, disciplines
and cares for the child 3) how much time do parents spend with their children and what is the
nature of the interaction 4) who, other than the parents, makes decisions about the child's
upbringing and education, and what is the basis for these decisions.
Ideally, the expert witness should have a substantial Opportunity to observe the parent-child
interaction in ethnographic context (at home in the cult interacting with cult leaders and other
cult members who are significant adults in the child's life). Alternatively, the expert should have
the opportunity to testify about the effects of the cult's practices as developed through the
testimony of others, through information provided by research-oriented experts, or through their
scholarly works.
Enlist the Help and Support of Other Ex-Members
Individuals who had left the Sullivanians relatively recently formed a supportive, informal ―re-
entry‖ network of friends and associates who were in close and frequent contact with one
another. The same is true for former members of many other groups.
The people in this network provided invaluable assistance to both the litigators and the litigants.
They testified as witnesses. They provided volunteer clerical services (helping, in a small way, to
minimize the inordinate financial discrepancies between the wealth of the cult and the budgets of
the independent parties). And, perhaps most importantly, they provided emotional and practical
support to the ex-member parent parties during the long ordeal of litigation which, for the
