I wonder if character witnesses should even be allowed in a trial. ANYONE can find (or pay) a few people that will swera that the accused is a GREAT guy/gal!
What does that have to do with the instance of a crime, to which the 'witness' has no knowledge?
The question of a trial is not if the accused is a nice person, a decent guy or anything like that. it is to judge, based on available evidence, if the accused committed the offence!
What can character witnesses really offer other than taking up time and clogging the process up even further?
2006-07-04 12:48:21 · 3 answers · asked by athorgarak 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Character witnesses are usually limited to people who could give relevant testimony as to the character of the person ... their employer, their spouse, their neighbours, etc. These are not just people a criminal can pay to give good testimony, but the details of what they testify about must be relevant to the person and alleged crime committed. Their usefulness is probably more relevant in the penalty phase, as these witnesses can provide information to show if this crime committed was out of character for the convicted individual.
2006-07-04 14:17:39 · answer #1 · answered by Angela B 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
In some trials the marker of being beyond reasonable doubt has not be met. I think in those instances a character witness could swing the verdict one way or another. Information never really hurts, the more the better. I can intuit a lot from not only meeting the accused but also knowing who their friends of enemies might be.
2006-07-04 13:21:31 · answer #2 · answered by Love of Truth 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
in the penalty phase.
2006-07-04 12:59:34 · answer #3 · answered by Luchador 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋