This paper debates some of the controversial aspects of conveying expert opinion, and considers how research proposes that scientists might balance the competing concerns of scientific exactness and understandability for nonscientists. Altering language is claimed a required component of assuring comprehension. However, conveying knowledge from a forensic scientist to a nonscientist is an intricate task. It is asserted that the dialogue and participation models of communication may help to promote comprehension of forensic science and enhance its value in the criminal justice system.