[thisuser]

Unfortunately law seems to be one of the most conservative institutions (i.e. slow to change) in existence. It it set up to be an adversarial system between two parties, and most of the institutional structure depends upon that. Between the desire for an adversarial system and constitutional right to trial by jury, I'm not sure how you can really move away from my expert witness vs your expert witness when examining evidence for a jury. Any ideas? A "technical judge" that adjudicates evidence into more explainable forms to be explained to the jury?

[WettowelReactor]

Conservative (risk aversion) and slow to change are not the same thing. By being slow to change law and lawyers introduce excessive risk in their offerings which, ironically, makes them negligent at their stated purpose.