Fort Benning Court Martial Lawyer on How to Witness Impeachment
Under prior practice, the party calling a witness was said to vouch for the witness. Essentially, that meant the party could not challenge the credibility of the witness. But, for, the witness does not have to be adverse.
Rule 607 provides that [t]he credibility of a witness may be attacked by any party, including the party calling the witness. The rule contemplates impeachment, however, not the attempted introduction of evidence that otherwise is hearsay. Put differently, the prosecution may not use impeachment by previous inconsistent statement as a subterfuge to avoid the hearsay rule. See United States v. Hogan, 763 F.2d 697, 702 (5th Cir. 1985). United States v. Ureta, 44 M.J. 290 (1996), cert. denied, 117 S. Ct. 692 (1997).
The general modes of attack are:
Observation: The witness could not adequately see/hear the incident in question because of poor lighting, cross-racial identification issues, distance from the scene, etc.
Recall: Because of the witnesses age, mental condition at the time of the incident or during trial, time gap between the incident and the in-court testimony, etc., the witness cannot accurately recollect the incident.
Relate: Due to of the witnessss age, mental condition, lack of expertise, etc., the witness cannot accurately. relate the information.
Comments on this entry are closed.