![]() ![]() Your neighbors need to be reminded of this. I would suggest, for whatever it's worth, that fears of "retaliation" are usually exaggerated - and in any case, the best way to deter it is to be strong and unafraid. Think about it from the other point of view: how would you feel if you were a party to a court case and the other side said "Here are some statements people made on my behalf against you, but you can't ask these people about what they're saying - and I'm not even going to tell you who they are"? You'd be horrified, and rightly so. That would never, ever be permitted, under any hearsay exception. ![]() ![]() If they were to "write statements" to the court about what they'd witnessed, then they'd be revealed to the opposing party all the same - except, I suppose, if they submitted these statements anonymously. Your neighbors' plan appears to be short-sighted, if I may say. A witness merely not wanting to appear, does not create a valid exception. There are various exceptions to the prohibition against hearsay, but they mostly relate to things like official documents, or to witnesses who are deceased or unavailable due to the very facts that caused the court case. Any out-of-court statement offered as evidence is not subject cross-examination in this way, and so is considered "hearsay," and so is probably not admissible as evidence. That means, the opposing side must be able to ask them questions in response to their testimony at the time. You cannot have people present their testimony as evidence at trial unless they are subject to cross-examination. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |