Drug addicts credible witness?

Question

I was reading articles about the Robert Pickton case. One of the key witnesses is a drug addict and her testimony is being thrown everywhere, the prosecutor claiming that her memory isn't good enough and that she might have been high at the time of witnessing the remains of a female in one of the slaughterhouses. Do you think that, despite her poor choices in life, she's still a credible witness?

Answer 1

The value of any witness is as it fits in with the rest of the case. Anyway being a witness is not a simple matter. We tend to see what we think we saw (that's how illusionist earn their living) and we like to hear what we want to hear (Paul Simon's line in The Boxer 'A man hear what he wants to hear and disregards the rest,' is apt)

In one case I know about, the court had to wait until a junkie witness was able to stand and give testimony. Very often they are the only people who were there, or found there, and you just have to rely on the jury and the court to make a sensible assessment.

Answer 2

Drug addicts are never credible witnesses. Most prosecutors shy away from using them. They get hammered easily by the defense for obvious reasons.

Answer 3

No, I think the fact that she is a drug addict makes her a poor witness in court.

Answer 4

No, she's not credible. That's one of the problems with breaking the law by doing illegal drugs; you lose credibility. Like it or not, that's a fact. She should have grown up a long time ago and became a law-abiding citizen.