Scientific evidence is frequently being introduced into the courtroom, sometimes leading to enormous controversy. To gain perspective on the use of such evidence, an international symposium is being convened at the University of California, Davis law school Friday, Jan. 31. During the one-day session titled "International Perspectives on Scientific Evidence," judges, lawyers and professors from the United States, Australia, The Netherlands and Great Britain will compare notes on how the evidence is used. In the past few years, several noteworthy developments in the use of scientific evidence have occurred, including the landmark 1993 Daubert case, which set a new standard for the admission of such evidence in U.S. courtrooms, and a 1996 National Research Council report on DNA testing. Those speaking during the symposium have been associated with such notable scientific evidence events as the Daubert case and the O.J. Simpson criminal trial. The conference is the first of its kind to include so many international speakers comparing how scientific evidence is used in courtrooms around the world, says law school professor and conference chair Edward Imwinkelried. Topics to be discussed at the symposium include how the Daubert case should have been decided, DNA evidence in the courtroom and judicial attitudes toward expert testimony. Imwinkelried notes that symposium speakers are "major players in scientific evidence," including the judge who wrote the Daubert opinion in the Ninth Circuit Court, the president of the first worldwide conference on scientific evidence, and a member of the Simpson defense team. The symposium will be held from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. in the Moot Court Room of the law school. The sessions are free, although those registering for MCLE credit will be charged $150. Papers from the conference will be printed in the UC Davis Law Review.