A lay witness is any witness who does not testify as an expert witness under oath in a court of law. The opinion of a lay witness at court is generally inadmissible. They can give evidence of facts which have been observed by their physical senses (e.g. sight, hearing, smell, touch or taste.)
A lay witness is not allowed to provide knowledge not normally possessed by the average person concerning the drink driving offence. Only an 'expert' witness can do this. An expert in a particular field can be called upon to state an opinion on a matter which is within his specialist knowledge and which is something upon which a layman could not be expected to form an opinion because of the skills required.
For example, in drink driving cases, a lay witness is not allowed to give evidence in the following areas:
They're allowed to cross-examine him. The witness is called to the stand - and gives their account of what they saw. The opposing counsel then has the chance to question the witness - in an attempt to disprove their evidence.
This is hearsay, which is a secondary source of information that is not allowed.
If the witness is testifying that HE heard the gunshots - it is called "direct evidence.' It is also a type called "testimonial" evidence as opposed to "demonstative" evidence. The testimonial evidence is that the witness testifies verbally that he heard the gun. The gun itself if entered into evidence would be demonstrative evidence.
Testimonial evidence is evidence given by a witness of things they've experienced first-hand. The first-hand account of a witness is called their testimony.
A witness can bring in character evidence of their good character when their character is relevant to the case, such as when their credibility is being challenged. This type of evidence can be used to show the witness's reputation for honesty or truthfulness.
A prosecution witness is called by the government to provide evidence against the defendant, while a defense witness is called by the defendant's legal team to provide evidence in support of the defendant's case.
Witness
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.
Oral testimony given in a court by a witness. Also called parol evidence.
Impeachment can refer to different legal concepts. One meaning refers to discrediting a witness by showing that he or she is not telling the truth or does not have a reliable basis for their testimony. Rules of evidence govern what type of questioning may be used to impeach a witness. Generally, unrelated evidence that the person is a" bad person" and therefore untrustworthy, is not allowed. See:http://definitions.uslegal.com/i/impeachment/ As stated above, the rules of evidence apply when attempting to impeach a witness. Therefore - hearsay evidence is NOT admissable for impeachment purposes. Added by: >128.59.182.89< : Hearsay can be used to impeach a witness for the element of truthfullness under prior inconsistent statments, but cannot be used to prove the matter under dispute. A witness may not be called solely for the purpose of being impeached as a way to get otherwise inadmissible hearsay before the jury. SEE DISCUSSION PAGE -
yes
The witness corroborated her evidence at the court.