It is not a repository for any question you may have. Here if the judge acts as per section 165 of evidence act then there may be a situation when the witness may be cross examined by the judge himself so that he may not be influenced by the adverse party. If you are cross-examined on your previous statement, that statement is only evidence of your inconsistency and is not proof of the facts contained in the statement. Client, about what time did you leave the bar? Hostile Witness A witness at a trial who is so adverse to the party that called him or her that he or she can be cross-examined as though called to testify by the opposing party. In order to sustain a prosecution under section 191 of I. And in case of latter, Mr.
The woman was a typical Mississippi welfare queen, kids by different men, no fathers around, never married, etc. Remember in most cases a defence lawyer only has to convince one or two jurors to get the accused off…. Another reason is the inordinate delay in disposal of cases. The whole thing was a farce and we didn't give her any money. Generally a lawyer cannot ask leading questions of witnesses unless the witness is on cross-examination or is being clearly evasive in the witness' answers i. And when he does appear, he is subjected to unchecked examination and cross-examination and finds himself in a hapless situation. Who Can Be Considered a Hostile Witness Hostile witnesses can only be declared as such by a judge, though it is generally at the request of the attorney posing the questions.
He waits for the whole day and then finds the matter adjourned. Instead, attorneys are supposed to ask open-ended questions, and the witness can then answer with entirely unprovoked responses. A leading question is one that suggests the answer, such as, 'You left the bar at about 10:00 p. A leading question is a question that implies the answer and usually involves a yes or no question. Now, if that witnesses is someone clearly identified with an adverse party in the case-let's say plaintiff calls to the stand in her case-in-chief an employee of the corporate defendant-then the lawyer may get to call the witness 'under cross-examination.
For all these reasons and others a person abhors becoming a witness. Leading questions should not be used on the direct examination of a witness except as may be necessary to develop the witness? These are typically friendly witnesses to you. A hostile witness is someone who's testimony is contrary to the facts and law the lawyer seeks to present, therefore the lawyer must now impeach the testimony of the witness. Usually, the witness will have given a written statement before getting into the witness box to give their evidence in court. It was felt that such actions are per se destructive, not only of the interests of the litigating parties, but also in the quest of the courts to meet the ends of justice.
They'd obviously had it work before or they wouldn't have tried it. Happily Trapped In the Past Thanks, Joe Not only a less than minimally educated person, but stupid and out of touch as well. In cross examination you can ask leading questions. But permission to treat a witness as hostile isn't usually all that exciting. It means that the witness you call to testify is not on your side, i. Since I've called the witness, I may ask the court to name the witness as 'hostile.
Thirdly, the judicial consideration under S. Traditionally when a lawyer calls a witness in their case in chief i. But it would be facile to conclude that India is on the way to reform of its criminal justice system. The remedy lay in better investigation which could be done by separating law and order duty of the police from investigation of cases. A witness is termed hostile, when he gives a certain statement on his knowledge about commission of a crime before the police but refutes it when called as witness before the court during trial.
Today, stringent laws against persons giving false evidence and against witnesses that turn hostile are very much the need of the hour. Your site may have a great algorithm, but it felt like an actual person choosing jobs they felt would be good based on my search. In the words of Wadwa,J. According to English statutory law the offence of hostility is recognized as perjury as per the Perjury Act, 1911. For example, these types of questions might start with 'Isn't it true you. I suggested we could cut the guy some slack. What offended me the most was her attempted use of the Bible as a prop to try and elicit sympathy from the jury.
Normally, a lawyer is given very little latitude when questioning witnesses favorable to her positions in the case. For more detailed information you should seek legal advice. For example, neither a judge nor a juror is competent to testify in a trial in which they are serving in that capacity; and in jurisdictions with a dead man statute, a person is deemed not competent to testify as to statements of or transactions with a deceased opposing party. Included in the statement are the facts and evidence that a witness agrees to provide in open court at the trial of the matter. In systems of proof based on the English common law tradition, almost all evidence must be sponsored by a witness, who has sworn or solemnly affirmed to tell the truth.