191). Since the Detective has been working within the Guns and Drugs Unit for many years‚ his hands on experience and knowledge makes his evidence credible. By answering questions from the Crown‚ the officer provided direct evidence through oral testimony while corroborating using his notes‚ as well as notes from notes from a central note taker to refresh his memory. What was unique about this court observation experience was the opportunity to view the best evidence rule in a court case. The best
Premium Witness Crime Police
C.A. No. 299 March 18‚ 1946 FELIX ADAN‚ plaintiff-appellant‚ vs. AGAPITO CASILI and VICTORIA ADAN‚ defendants-appellees. OZAETA‚ J.: The plaintiff Felix Adan commenced this action in the Court of First Instance of Camarines Sur against his sister Victoria Adan and the latter’s husband‚ Agapito Casili‚ to secure the judicial partition of the estate left by their deceased mother‚ Simplicia Nepomuceno‚ alleged to consist of six parcels of land which are specifically described in
Premium Plaintiff Defendant Complaint
The Loftus and Palmer study is a laboratory experiment. This means that the study is artificial. The artificiality of the setting can intimidate participants or make them more obedient. This in turn can produce unnatural behavior and results that do not generalize to real life. This can be seen in experiment 2 when 12% of the control group reported seeing broken glass even though they were unaffected by the verb. This could be attributed to the leading question or to demand characteristics when
Premium Testimony Scientific method Thought
With reference to alternative research findings‚ critically assess Loftus and Palmer’s research into Leading questions. Loftus and Palmer concluded (1974) concluded from their experiments that leading questions can alter the representation in your memory. Before the Loftus and Palmer undertook their studies into the effects of leading questions on memory recollection‚ Carmichael (1932) researched the effect of different labels on the reproduction of identical figures. They showed two sets of
Premium Testimony Question Psychology
within three months. Based on her testimony and lack of witnesses‚ it seems that this was a retaliation of her getting fired. 2. From what you know of this case‚ do you think the jury arrived at the correct decision? If not‚ why not? If so‚ why? I do not think the jury made the correct decision. There was not any recorded or written proof that the verbal abuse took place‚ there were no witnesses‚ and it seems that there was a lack of quality testimony. Based on the facts presented‚ I do
Premium Bullying Testimony Sexual harassment
Crawford v. Washington Analysis Janilsa Alejo de Smith Wilmington University Crawford v. Washington Analysis Cross-examination is critical during litigation. Many cases have to be proven based on solely witness testimony because of the lack of physical evidence. Therefore‚ the responsibility of a witness to tell the truth relies on methods to encourage witnesses to maintain their credibility. According to Gardner and Anderson in their book Criminal Evidence: Principles and Cases‚ the witnesses
Premium Evidence law Testimony Supreme Court of the United States
Section 133 of the Indian Evidence Act‚ 1872 deals with the Accomplice Witness. It says that an accomplice shall be a competent witness against an accused person; and a conviction is not illegal merely because it proceeds upon the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice. Usually most of the crimes are committed at secluded places where there will not be any eye – witness to testify regard to these offences‚ and it would not be possible for the police to get sufficient evidence to prove the guilt
Premium Evidence law Crime Criminal law
Grissom - I tend not to believe people. People lie. The evidence doesn’t lie. The entire corpus juris (body of laws) is broadly classified into 2 categories‚ i) substantive laws‚ and ii) adjective laws. Substantive laws are those‚ which define the rights‚ duties and liabilities‚ the ascertainment of which is the purpose of every judicial enquiry. Adjective laws are those‚ which define the pleading and procedure by which substantive laws are applied in practice. The Indian Evidence Act is the adjective
Free Question Answer Testimony
Competence and compellability of witnesses * A person to give evidence in court has to be legally competent‚ subject to the rules of admissibility. * A witness is compelled to give evidence‚ even if it’s against his will. * Failure to do so will result in contempt of court. However it is also contempt of court for a witness to refuse without lawful authority to answer questions put to him. * The modern test for the competence of witnesses varies‚ depending what type of case it
Free Criminal law Jury Testimony
would have reinforced the extent of his injuries and could have convinced the jury of a different opinion. Additionally‚ if admissible‚ the suppressed hair and fiber evidence would have been damning to the prosecution’s case. And if the convincing testimonies of Heather Stoeckley and her friend were allowed and investigated‚ the jury may have viewed the entire case thru a different lens. Ultimately‚ America is still divided on this case. There are still those that believe justice was served‚ while others
Premium O. J. Simpson murder case Jury Murder