0
Can you be convicted of a crime soley off the testimony of the victim with out evidence?
Wiki User
∙ 14y ago
It IS possible if his testimony and knowledge is strong enough AND, what's more important, the jury believes them.
Wiki User
∙ 14y ago
Wiki User
∙ 14y ago"Evidence" includes the testimony of witnesses. So, yes, you can be convicted based upon the credible testimony of the victim to a crime.
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
How do you solve crime?
You gather and process evidence and testimony.
Can trespassing get you convicted?
Yes, trespassing is a crime, and if there is sufficient evidence you did it, you will be convicted.
If there is no witness can you be convicted of a crime?
Yes. If there is compelling evidence, even in the absence of a witness, you can be convicted of a crime. Also, if there is a proven motive in addition to the evidence, that will add to the probabibility of a conviction.
Can you try someone for murder if there is no body?
Several possibilities: (#1-and best of all) a confession by the perpetrator. Failing that; (#2) The defendant had a good motive and good circumstantial evidence can be proven. It is a bit unusual, BUT NOT A RARITY, for a defendant to be convicted in the absence of the victim's actual remains.
What is the petition filing fee in Louisiana for a victim to motion to dismiss criminal prosecution case?
There is no legal action of the sort referred to. The victim of a crime may choose not to give voluntary testimony as evidence at a trial, but they do not have the power to request that charges be dismissed. In most cases a victim can be forced to give testimony and if necessary the PA can request to have such testimony entered into the court record as being given by a "hostile or unco-operative witness".
Why should a convicted criminal make restitution to the victim?
A victim of a crime should be recompensed by any illegal act against them.
What is scientific data called when used in a courtroom setting to establish the connection of a person to a crime?
testimony
What is a forensic scientist's job in solving a crime?
Forensic scientists analyze physical evidence collected from crime scenes to provide insights that can help solve crimes. They use scientific methods to examine items like DNA, fingerprints, and firearms, and provide expert testimony in court based on their findings. Their work is crucial in helping law enforcement agencies piece together the details of a crime and identify suspects.
Why are there crime scene investigators?
Because there are crime scenes that need to be investigated to obtain evidence relating to the crime so that the perpetrator of the crime can be identified and convicted in a court of law.
Can you get charged with a crime if people just say you did it and you say you didnt but your fingerprints come up in the crime?
Yes. Witness testimony combined with fingerprint evidence is pretty strong evidence in a criminal trial.
Can a person be convicted of a crime without proper evidence the accusor states that she thinks he had a gun in the discovery?
People have been convicted without proper evidence. The accusation should be investigated; perhaps you did have a gun and fear a conviction based solely on her testimony. I don't know how to prove a negative (that you did not have a gun), but if you did there are other ways to show it besides her say so; other people saw it, there is other evidence of a gun in your possession like bullets or a gun box. This is why you need a lawyer.
What is the difference between transactional and use immunity Should a person be able to be prosecuted once they have been given immunity?
"Transactional immunity" - gives full immunity from prosecution for a crime revealed from the testimony of a witness. This type acts much like a full pardon for the offence, once granted one may not be prosecuted. "Use" immunity - is the base line protection afforded by the 5th Amendment, use of compelled testimony and the use of evidence derived form the testimony can't be used to convict a witness. To be convicted for a crime testified about, the prosecution has the burden to show that the evidence used was derived by a complete, separate source of information.
