Witness testimonies are often unreliable due to the nature of human memory. For this discussion, 'testimony ' will be used loosely to represent a statement, written or spoken, made by any person claiming to have seen or experienced anything relating to their respective case. The chosen scope for this discussion is cases of sexual assault because very often in such cases the only evidence presented is a testimony, either by the victim or a witness. Aside from the aforementioned, DNA evidence has been used very frequently in sexual assault cases, however, the only fact that DNA evidence can prove is that some sort of sexual activity took place. In cases where the act itself is not illegal, for instance when both parties are fully capable legal adults, the issue of consent can only be settled with witness or victim testimonies. That is, of course, provided that video evidence is not presented, which it often is not and will therefore not be…
Expert witness testimonies must be scientific, technical, and specifically relevant that will acknowledge the trier of fact to define evidence and determine the fact of the issue. Evidence obtained by expert witness’s must be based off of sufficient facts produced by applicable, reliable, principles and methods. In response to Daubert v. Merrill Daw Pharmaceuticals ( 509 U.S. 579 (1993), and other cases applying the Daubert standard. Under the Daubert standard the expert’s theory must be…
Stakeholders When it comes to witness intimidation, there are several stake holders to take into account. These stakeholder can be greatly affected by the act of witness intimidation and the come from varying fields. These field span from social to legal with perspectives that vary as well. In no particular order, the first of the stakeholders include victim-witness units and crime victim advocacy groups (Debel, 2006). For these two stakeholders the main purpose of them is to be there for…
In Greene and Loftus’s study, “Solve the eyewitness problem” (1984), the issue is raised by psychologists McCloskey and Egeth (1983) is that whether or not the improvement of the evaluation from the juror happens when there is the support from the expert (p. 400). The argument explains when the juror needs clarification and further understanding on the inaccurate eyewitness, their mind has formed the idea of the witness is already unreliable, which fades out their incredulity. Moreover, there is…
According to Piaget, children are often egocentric. This egocentrism allows them take world events and bring them into their own perspective. This causes them to oftentimes not pay attention to what others are saying which would prove ineffective if a child is to be an eye witness (Siegler and Alibali, 2005, p. 40). For how can one testify if they are not truly listening to or understanding the context of the situation before them? Pro Argument Article In an article published in the…
Youngblood and African American male. He was wrongfully convicted of sexual assault, kidnapping, and child molestation of the young Latino boy name David Leon. At the time of the crime Larry was 30 years old. And the incident happened in the state of Arizona, on October 29th, 1983. A ten-year-old boy was abducted from a carnival in Pima county, Arizona. The young boy was molested by an unknown suspect. Larry was taken to the hospital to collect the semen DNA samples, as well as the clothes he…
a tired, apologetic face” (Gessen 170). This witness could have played out well for the prosecution if the prosecution had prepared the witness better because the witness testimony was riddled with fallacies that could have helped Pussy Riot if Pussy Riot had a fair trial. The first fallacy that in the Sokologorskaya testimony was a tu quoque, which is a fallacy that is an opponent 's argument has no value because the opponent does not follow his or her own advice. This shows up when…
credibility and making judgments based on witness statements on whether or not they are being truthful.…
III. THE COURT IMPROPERLY PRECLUDED MR. TULIN’S COUNSEL FROM COMMENTING ON THE COURTROOM DEMEANOR OF MS. MARCELIN, IN VIOLATION OF MR. TULIN’S RIGHTS UNDER THE CONFRONTATION CLAUSE Ms. Marcelin, while exiting the witness stand, but still in the courtroom and within plain sight of the jury, purposefully waved and smiled at Mr. Tulin. Mr. Tulin, through counsel, brought this fact to the court’s attention; however, the court precluded counsel from making any references to or arguments from this…
Marland (1963) and Giglio v. United States (1972), the Supreme Court has imposed rulings that all exculpatory evidence must be disclosed and that the defendant has a right to learn of any incriminating and/or discrediting information pertaining to the witnesses against them and may result in impeachment of witness testimony. With that said, an officer’s ability to be an effective law enforcement official has diminished in the eyes of the department because his or her lack of integrity and…