As a chemical engineer, it pains me to see how utterly ignorant JB is regarding some of the technical isssues in this case. Toxicology can be easily defined as the harmful effects of chemicals on living organisms. There is not a strict definition of organic chemistry although most would say it has to do with carbon containing chemicals. Of course there are some carbon containing compounds which most would agree are inorganic. For JB to suggest that a toxicologist is not competent to determine if a compound is organic or not because he isn't an organic chemist is ludicrous. His arguments regarding qualitative vs quantitative chemical analysis also reflect a fundamental misunderstanding of what these terms mean and were quite misleading to the jury.
BTW, if the Court requires an expert witness to have a recognized degree in their field of expertise, eg Dr. Vass can not call himself a chemist or testify regarding chemistry, then how in the world can someone qualify as an expert traumatologist who has not been certified and doesn't even though what a peer review is? Yikes!
BTW, if the Court requires an expert witness to have a recognized degree in their field of expertise, eg Dr. Vass can not call himself a chemist or testify regarding chemistry, then how in the world can someone qualify as an expert traumatologist who has not been certified and doesn't even though what a peer review is? Yikes!