- This topic has 5 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Totally agree Miss Mid City, especially with points I, V and VII. I will be breathing a huge sigh of relief when this trial is over. But I think we are going to be feeling the repercussions of the fallout for many years to come.
Actually, I think you may be right …
I’m not sure Ian knew about Pavel or whether he was just very suspicious … but he did know that Helen saw Adam and Charlie kissing.
Still, he wouldn’t want it made public, would he?!
Miss_Mid_City, you are nothing short of a legal altruist! I love reading your views, and the way you include everyone’s thoughts and observations to put your legal spin on them. It’s a little as if we’re all the jury and you’re our foreman! Just wanted to say thank you for bothering and how much you’re appreciated. Please keep your comments rolling!
Thanks, Sarahsarie! That’s very kind of you.
Turns out I was wrong about the whole surprise witness thing, though! When I was a Baby Barrister I had to appear in different courts and tribunals. I found out that they all do things in their own way.
In my experience, “lastminute.com” witnesses are often not welcome in the immigration or family courts which is the way I usually ply my trade. It’s a matter for the judge whether he or she allows late evidence but the evidence itself has to have a high “probative” value and be crucial to a fair and just outcome of the case. It clearly depends on the jurisdiction and its own rules of procedure.
I remember when I used to do personal injury cases, late evidence causes a lot of inconvenience and the person in the wrong can end up paying financially for their wrongdoing. Looks like it’s more a case of “anything goes” in the criminal courts – especially the fictional ones … !
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.