The reliability of evidence in a criminal trial is a multidimensional issue and relates to the assessment of the evidential value of a specific circumstance established in the case through activities performed by expert witness or authorities. The reliability (trustworthy) of the source of evidence and identification methods, performance of research, deduction and the context of other evidence seem to be one of the important implications for the evidential value.
Results of the survey of participants of the criminal trial (police officers, prosecutors and experts) and comparative group on the perception of various features of identification methods and selected aspects related to the status of a forensic expert is presented in the article. In the first part of the study, the identification methods were ranked in terms of their scientificity, reliability and willingness to convict on the basis of the method’s results. The research shows that the assessment of the method’s reliability is significantly correlated with the assessment of its scientificity. However, some exceptions to this relationship have been identified, indicating that the reliability of the method may also be the result of an assessment of its suitability and effectiveness. The second part of the research was focused on assessing the reliability of various expert opinions. The place of examinations carried out by an expert is important for the participants of the criminal trial. Opinions of forensic experts performed at specialist institutions were assessed as the most reliable.
