Last edited by Kazishakar
Saturday, July 25, 2020 | History

5 edition of Comments on the rule on examination of a child witness found in the catalog.

Comments on the rule on examination of a child witness

Oscar M. Herrera

Comments on the rule on examination of a child witness

by Oscar M. Herrera

  • 2 Want to read
  • 14 Currently reading

Published by Rex Book Store in Manila, Philippines .
Written in English


Edition Notes

Includes bibliographical references and indexes.

StatementOscar M. Herrera.
The Physical Object
Paginationxi, 281 p. ;
Number of Pages281
ID Numbers
Open LibraryOL17078692M
ISBN 109789712350412
LC Control Number2008337324
OCLC/WorldCa243960592

contradict other witnesses. c Witnesses testify only in response to the questions you ask, which places a burden on you to be comprehensive and articulate. c The rules of evidence limit the form of questions and the content of testimony. Many rules, such as the hearsay rule, defy common sense, make telling the complete story difficult, and make. The third rule, perhaps underpinning all the others, is that you must prepare your cross-examination meticulously. You need to think, so far as you can anticipate it, of the worst answer that the witness might give andhow you are going to follow up their answer.

minor child(ren) and/or denial of passport services (b) temporary injunction to prevent removal of minor child(ren) and/or denial of passport services (ex parte) (c) temporary injunction to prevent removal of minor child(ren) and/or denial of passport services (after notice) (d) emergency verified motion for child .   If, on redirect, the original sponsor of the witness explores the new subjects, he is permitted the same latitude that is allowed in a normal cross examination. IX. THE LAY OPINION RULE. Witnesses are required to give their answers in the form of statements of what they saw, heard, felt, tasted, or smelled.

  Rule Competency of Juror as Witness. Rule Who May Impeach. Rule Evidence of Character and Conduct of Witness. Rule Impeachment by Evidence of Conviction of Crime. Rule Religious Beliefs or Opinions. Rule Mode and Order of Interrogation and Presentation. Rule Writing Used to Refresh Memory. Rule Prior. Child Witnesses A. Competency of Child Witnesses 1. General rule 2. Procedure for determining competency 3. Application of standard 4. Unavailability distinguished from incompetency 5. Quashing of subpoena for child B. Examination of Child Witnesses 1. Remote testimony 2. Excluding bystanders during child’s testimony 3.


Share this book
You might also like
The element of irony in English literature

The element of irony in English literature

The mystery of personality

The mystery of personality

American Presidency in Political cartoons

American Presidency in Political cartoons

Soil survey of St. Joe area, parts of Benewah and Shoshone Counties, Idaho

Soil survey of St. Joe area, parts of Benewah and Shoshone Counties, Idaho

Aap beti

Aap beti

Poems and fragments.

Poems and fragments.

Water vapor profiles for Boulder, Colorado, and Pago Pago, American Samoa during the period 1986-1989

Water vapor profiles for Boulder, Colorado, and Pago Pago, American Samoa during the period 1986-1989

Selection and on-the-job training of school principals.

Selection and on-the-job training of school principals.

Not for Sadie

Not for Sadie

Vicky angel

Vicky angel

The Meddybemps Fair

The Meddybemps Fair

Timeless Voices, Timeless Themes

Timeless Voices, Timeless Themes

Comments on the rule on examination of a child witness by Oscar M. Herrera Download PDF EPUB FB2

The high point of the proceedings was the child's appearance as a live witness in order for Barker's counsel to attempt a cross-examination.

This case focused attention on the need, imposed by current English law, for even tiny children to come to court for a live cross-examination.5/5(2). A child witness is not a miniature version of an adult witness. Young children think, relate, and communicate in a qualitatively different manner than adults.

They have vulnerabilities, needs, and limitations not found among adult witnesses. The management of child witness cases and the evaluation of evidence from children require aFile Size: 1MB. ↑ "A child under ten years of age is a competent witness unless the court finds that the child lacks the capacity to remember or to relate truthfully facts respecting which the child is examined.

A child describing any act or event may use language appropriate for a child of that age." M.S.A. §subd. 1(m); see also State v. question and the scope of direct, cross, and redirect examination. The rule supplements, but does not override, statutes that establish procedure for the order and presentation of evidence.

Under Rule a trial judge is required to “exercise reasonable control over the mode and order” of witness interrogation and evidence presentation.

/ The Child Witness may unwittingly reinforce the child's competence in the eyes of the jury. Recess to Reduce Anxiety or Stress Testifying is a traumatic event for nearly all witnesses, and children are no exception.

Due to their immaturity, however, many children. The phrase of the rule, “witness identified with” an adverse party, is designed to enlarge the category of persons thus callable. Notes of Committee on the Judiciary, House Report No. 93– As submitted by the Court, Rule (b) provided: A witness may be cross-examined on any matter relevant to any issue in the case, including credibility.

Connecticut Practice Book - PDF To find a particular Practice Book section, click on the link above and then use the links on the left side of the screen to find the section you are looking for.

Or click on the link above and use the Ctrl and F keys on the keyboard and type in the name of the rule or the section number you are looking for. Much of what I needed to know about cross-examination came from a one-hour training session at the public defender's office in Philadelphia.

Fred Goodman led the session. You use short, declarative sentences, he taught us, to tell your side of the story. You use a rhythm and cadence in which you reward the witness for cooperating with you. You get the witness to agree with you on as many.

Given the earlier examination and the further preliminary hearing, there can be no serious claim of abuse of discretion. Moreover, under the new Federal Rules of Evidence it is doubtful that mental incompetence would even be grounds for disqualification of a prospective witness.

Rule. Action for Adoption of a Child: Part 5: A: Adoption of a Child or an Adult; Use of Automated System; Name Checks: Part 5: Action for Adoption of Adult: Part 5: Proceedings by Division of Child Protection and Permanency: Part 5: Proceedings Under the Child Placement Review Act: Part 5: however, when the child has been victimized by the offender, the situation becomes traumatic.

Unfortunately, more and more frequently the testimony of a child victim of physical or emotional violence or sexual abuse is the only way to stop the child’s suffering and punish the offender.

The person interviewing a child witness faces two major. witness who is not subject to cross-examination at trial. 10 For example, Crawford issues arise when the State seeks to admit: • out -of court statements of a nontestifying domestic violence victim to first responding officers or to a operator; • out -of court statements of a nontestifying child.

children and other vulnerable witnesses and defendants, but much of it is also relevant to civil and family cases and tribunal hearings with a vulnerable witness, party (Rule (4)(b), Criminal Procedure Helping vulnerable witnesses to begin cross‐examination while they are fresh by not.

Direct Examination of the Expert Witness: 10 Basic Rules. INTRODUCTION. It perhaps sounds surprising, but the most difficult skill to master in trial advocacy may be conducting good direct examination of a witness, particularly an expert witness.

(a) Examination on Motion. On motion of any party in interest, the court may order the examination of any entity.

(b) Scope of Examination. The examination of an entity under this rule or of the debtor under § of the Code may relate only to the acts, conduct, or property or to the liabilities and financial condition of the debtor, or to any matter which may affect the administration of the.

The California Evidence Code sets out rules about what kind of evidence may be introduced in a criminal jury most important California criminal evidence rules include: The rule that all evidence introduced at trial must be relevant, 1 The rule that all evidence have “foundation”—that is, that it be reliable, 2 Rules about who is competent to serve as a witness, 3Author: Dee M.

In-House Counsel, Litigators, Trials. 2 Outlines Of Witness Examinations: Learning From Mistakes It's harder than you realize to draft witness examinations and.

Cross examination has been described as “greatest legal engine ever invented for the discovery of truth.” 5 J. Wigmore, Evidence §p. 32 (J. Chadbourn rev.

Although I think e-discovery is a more powerful engine for discovering the truth, effectively utilizing cross examination questions comes in at a close second and is indispensable when e-discovery isn’t available.

Cross Examination: The Rules of the Game Page 7 JACQUELINE M. VALDESPINO, ESQUIRE VALDESPINO & ASSOCIATES, PA end the examination on a strong point.9 7. DO NOT QUARREL WITH THE WITNESS: Regardless of what the witness testifies to, do not argue with the witness.

When you ask a question, and “the answer is contradictory, absurd, patently false. Perfecting cross-examination is an elusive goal.

It is all but impossible to control every witness you face. Once the rules become a part of you, however, cross becomes instinctive, and you will win more cases out of the mouths of adverse witnesses than you ever dreamt possible.

Many fundamentals of cross-examination are anything but secret. (4) Rule (a). Examining Witness Concerning Prior Statement. Rule (a) provides that a prior inconsistent statement need not be shown to a witness prior to cross-examination thereon.

Illinois Central Railroad v. Wade, Ill.69 N.E. (), was to the contrary. (5) Rule (d). Statements Which Are Not Hearsay.examination, and (2) those intended to raise questions about the credibility of the witness.

Admissibility of the first kind is governed by ordinary rules of relevancy. The second category is known as “impeachment,” and has its own set of rules. The cross-examining attorney is bound by the same rules of evidence as the attorney who.court’s authority under Rule (a) to control the mode of ques-tioning “to avoid needless consumption of time.” Leading ques-tions are also permitted when the testimony is cumulative or tangential to the central issue21 or as follow-up questions on re-direct examination Child Witnesses, Witnesses of .