Science Evidence v. Technolgy Evidence
To separate the concepts of science from technology
To identify the differences between the two types of expertise
To introduce the Science Manual for Canadian Judges
To suggest that a scientist giving evidence, where his/her expertise is limited to technological expertise, is stepping outside his/her qualifications respecting scientific evidence rather than just technological evidence
To limit the Court's findings based on the Crown expert's evidence
To raise a concern as to what happens if someone who is otherwise an eminent scientist in his field, starts stepping into the area of measurement science without having done empirical testing and without being able to be a person who has raised hypotheses and tested them empirically.
To clarify that the weight that should be attached to technology is entirely based upon compliance with quality assurance and quality control.
To challenge the "scientific" evidence from the Crown's expert that deviations from quality assurance and quality control don't make any difference