As the criminal defendant, you have a Fifth Amendment right to not testify against yourself.
Thus, if you want to testify, it is your attorney who shall question you on Direct.
Thereafter, the Prosecution shall have a chance to question you on Cross-examination.
Next, your attorney can question you on re-Direct.
Thereafter, the Prosecution can question you on re-Cross; and so on...
2007-05-07 09:18:59
·
answer #1
·
answered by MenifeeManiac 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Criminal law in this part of the world is based on the presumption of innocence. The guilt of the accused must be proven by the state beyond a reasonable doubt. For this reason, it is the state that must first proceed to prove its case. By the time the state rests its case, the state should have proven the essential elements of the offence. This is very complicated but can be summarized as who, what, when, where, with whom and with what. If the states failed to do this in evidence, the lawyer for the accused person can bring a motion for non suit/directed-verdict on the basis that the state failed to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. There are risks for the defense in doing this because at this point the lawyer is asking the judge to render its verdict thus ending the trial. If the motion is successful then this is a good result and if not then it is not good because it results in a verdict of guilt. It takes experience to make this call or not.
After the state rests its case and no motion for a direct verdict is made, it is now upon the defense to present the case for the defense. An accused person has the right to remain silent at trial and some times this the best course of action to take. Some times it is not. It is a lawyer’s most difficult decision to make as to whether his client should or will testify. If the client does testify, it is open game on him and the state will get a chance to cross-examine him in great detail including any criminal history. Many criminal defense lawyers will advise their clients against testifying. Often, the state’s case was sufficiently weakened on cross-examination by the defense and the risk outweighs the benefit of having the accused person testify. So in all, nobody will ask the accused/defendant anything if he does not testify. He cannot be compelled to testify against himself as this would be a violation of the presumption of innocence that includes the right to remain silent.
The presumption of innocence is nice and lasts throughout the entire proceeding. Still, there comes the time in a trial when the state has basically crossed the threshold of persuasion. This means that there is enough evidence that should the case, such as it is at that point, be left in the hands of the trier of facts(judge alone or in the case of a jury trail, the jury) guilt will be the verdict. Defense lawyers know this well and as a result, some effort will have to be put into putting forward the case for the defense. This may or may not include calling the accused/defendant to testify on his own behalf.
I do not know what PC1370 individuals are but this kind a question is best discussed with their lawyers. There is no one single answer for every case. If these are persons that are not represented, it would be best to try and get them legal assistance via a state funded legal aid system if at all possible.
2007-05-07 16:28:28
·
answer #2
·
answered by Guit Man 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
The prosecutor presents his case and calls his witness' first.
That is not the defendant.... The defendant’s attorney cross examines all the witness' if he chooses, right after the prosecutor asks his questions. After the prosecutor has presented all of his witness' ... the defendant gets to bring his witnesses up.. Then the Defendant’s attorney asks the first questions and the prosecutor gets to cross examine the defense witnesses, each right after the defense attorney is finished.
2007-05-07 15:45:29
·
answer #3
·
answered by James Q 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The defendant is not required to testify. Only the defense attorney can call on them to testify
2007-05-07 15:49:40
·
answer #4
·
answered by redd headd 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
The criminal is the defendent in a criminal trial - defending against the criminal accusations.
Or, is this a question like the plane going down on the Canadian/USA border and where are the survivors buried?!
2007-05-07 15:45:55
·
answer #5
·
answered by Ben 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
The prosecution will have the cross-examination, however the defense can ask to examine again.
The prosecution cannot call you to the stand, only the defense can do that.
2007-05-07 15:46:17
·
answer #6
·
answered by truthspeaker10 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Usually the Prosecution goes first in presenting it's case in court, and the defense rebuts it. Then the defense gets to call its' witnesses and the prosecution gets to rebut, so it would depend on who called that person to the stand.
2007-05-07 15:46:11
·
answer #7
·
answered by afsm666 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Whoever called you as a witness asks you questions first. Then, the other side has the opportunity to cross-examine.
2007-05-07 15:44:47
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋