Credibility: The Individua R V. D) (1991)

Credibility: What the court considers when assessing credibility
In a courtroom setting credibility is very important whether it be from the defendant, the plaintiff, the witnesses or the lawyers. Individuals that are speaking in court whether it is a witness, the parties involved in the trial or the representatives all need to be credible in order for the trial to be successful. Credibility deals directly with the individual that is speaking in court whether it is the parties involved or a witness. According to The Merriam Website Dictionary credibility is defined as “the quality of being believed or accepted as true, real or honest.” Credibility is being assessed by all of the individuals inside the courtroom whether it is the parties involved, the judge or the jury if applicable. There are many different factors that can influence the credibility of a person during a trial these include, the physical characteristics of the individual and their background as well as the accuracy and details of the statement(s). Both the appearance of the
DW, a forty-two year old man was charged with sexually assaulting a sixteen-year-old girl (his niece) on two occasions while driving her to her boyfriend’s house. Besides her claim of the event there was a lack of circumstantial evidence. At trial before a judge and jury the defense claimed she was not credible because she is an unemployed dropout and had been thrown out of several friends homes since she left her parent’s home. However, the accused was also a poor witness because of his lack of credibility as well, he has a lack of education and diminished intelligence. The accused is unable to read or write and according to his testimony is not even able to count money. As a result, this has made his testimony unclear and there are several inconsistencies. The result of the case was that the appeal was dismissed and the guilty charge was