This paper concerns different aspects of four dilemmas of objectivity and bias facing expert witnesses in trials involving violence between intimates: (1) the urge to be correct, clever, and consistent; (2) the tension between being an advocate and being an educator in the courtroom; (3) the influence of experts' life experiences and presumed values on the content and reception of testimony; and (4) the bias that has resulted from family violence researchers' neglect of social class as a significant contributor to the experiences of battered women. Four examples are used to illustrate these aspects. With regard to the fourth diliemma, data is presented on the relationship between social class and criminal justice system outcome for 25 battered women who killed their abusers. The difficulty in transcending class issues and achieving a real understanding of the impact of battering by an intimate in the lives of women of different backgrounds is recognized and the need to separate social class issues from dangerousness concerns is stressed. (NB)