Chapter 5 explores the use of expert and experiential evidence in the CoP, particularly analysing the contribution of the evidence given by the Person, linking with the arguments set out in Chapters 3 and 4. Analysing the empirical data, the chapter argues that the current hierarchy of evidence in the CoP undermines access to justice for the Person at the centre of proceedings and that changes are required to rebalance the evidential practices to achieve a more just process. The chapter starts with an overview of the use of evidence in proceedings, before turning to the hierarchies of knowledge, exploring the underpinning evidential justifications for both expert and experiential knowledge claims and the differing value attributed to each. Following analysis of the hierarchy of evidence, it is explained how this impacts upon access to justice and how this shows that the CoP has failed to secure procedural justice in this regard. The final section includes some examples of possible reforms to CoP evidential practices to address the procedural justice problem identified.

Verification and falsification are standard techniques for the evaluation of truth claims. Both are problematic because they rest on shifting understandings of these concepts and their operationalization. Science as a practice offers an alternative and more sophisticated approach to assessment.