“For many reasons, I agree that our adversarial system is a very flawed way to assess expert testimony. I don’t agree, however, that the qualities of a good scientist would necessarily be incompatible with persuasiveness,” said Barbara A. Spellman of the UVA School of Law. “A good scientist, who is also a good teacher, should be able to explain things in ways that jurors would find understandable and, therefore, if appropriate, persuasive.”