What is impeachment? Do Now: What do you think the legal definition of impeachment is? Answer: Process of destroying the credibility of a witness.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Use of Prior Statements, Depositions and Corollary Proceedings: Searing Impeachment and Effective Rehabilitation FITZPATRICK,
Advertisements

CHAP. 4, part 1 of 3: DEFINITIONAL EXCEPTIONS TO THE MEANING OF HEARSAY P. JANICKE 2012.
“Holy #$%^ I Cannot Believe I did that” What NOT to overlook in trial How to do it better What NOT to overlook in trial How to do it better.
CHAP. 8: IMPEACHMENT P. JANICKE Chap Impeachment2 DEFINITION AND METHODS IMPEACHMENT IS THE PROCESS OF ATTEMPTING TO WEAKEN THE PERCEIVED.
Chapter 8 Trial Procedures. The Players Judge Appointed by government Full control of courtroom Decides question of guilt (when there is no jury) and.
Criminal Evidence 6th Edition
THE TRIAL IN CANADIAN COURTS – Part 2 LAW 12 MUNDY
Hearsay and Its Exceptions
Rule 609: Use of Convictions to Attack Credibility.
Advanced Direct and Cross-Examination
Common Trial Procedures United States. Opening Statements.
PRIOR INCONSISTENT STATEMENTS FRE 801(d) Non Hearsay by definition Rule 801(d)(1) Prior Statement by Witness is not hearsay If declarant testifies and.
CHAP. 8: IMPEACHMENT P. JANICKE Chap Impeachment2 DEFINITION AND METHODS IMPEACHMENT IS THE PROCESS OF ATTEMPTING TO WEAKEN THE PERCEIVED.
Evidence Prof. William A. Woodruff Federal Criminal Practice Seminar Nov 2, 2012 Raleigh, NC © 2012.
The Roles of Judge and Jury Court controls legal rulings in the trial Court controls legal rulings in the trial Jury decides factual issues Jury decides.
The Credibility Rule: When, Why and How. Definitions Credibility of a witness means the credibility of any part or all of the evidence of the witness,
Mock Trial Modified by Dennis Gerl from Evidence PPT by John Ed-Bishop
Character and credit Miiko Kumar 9 February 2015.
Please review for your quiz.
Trial Preparation Washington & Lee School of Law October 19, 2006.
Chapter 7 Competency and Credibility. Competency: A witness is properly able to take the stand and give testimony in court. Competency is the second test.
Confidential: Attorney-Client Privilege and Attorney Work Product Houston ● Dallas How to Offer and Exclude Evidence:
Evidence Professor Cioffi Evidence Professor Cioffi 2/2/2011 – 2/16/
Chapter 13 Testifying in Court. Testifying in Court  To effectively testify in court:  Be prepared.  Look professional.  Act professionally.  Attempts.
Trial advocacy workshop
Criminal Evidence 7th Edition
Chapter 20 Writing Reports, Preparing for and Presenting Cases in Court.
Procedure Procedure at Trial. 1) Court Clerk reads the charge Indictment - if vague - quashed (struck down)
Unit 3 Seminar! K. Austin Zimmer Any question from Unit 2! Please make sure you have completed your Unit 1 & 2 Papers!
Basic Evidence and Trial Procedure. Opening Statement  Preview the evidence “The evidence will show”  Introduce theme  Briefly describe the issues,
“Death-Qualification” of Jurors in Capital Cases Lockhart v. McCree 476 U.S. 162 (1986)
 WATCH THE VIDEO CLIP, THEN GO TO THE WEB SITE WRITE DOWN WHAT’s THE MOST IMPORTANCE PART OF THE TRIAL AND TELL WHY. 
ADVANCED DIRECT AND CROSS-EXAMINATION Module 2. Organization Of Discussion  Direct examination techniques  Refreshing recollection, past recollection.
Trial Courts (pages 46 to 50). Trial Courts Courts that listen to testimony, consider evidence, and decide the facts.
Types of Evidence From Arraignment to Verdict. Self-Incrimination The Canada Evidence Act - regulates rules of evidence (1893). Applies to federal jurisdictions.
THE TRIAL IN CANADIAN COURTS – Part 3 RULES AND TYPES OF EVIDENCE LAW 12 MUNDY
Impeachment Caroline Goldner Cinquanto Adjunct Professor Temple University, Beasley School of Law.
The Criminal Trial Process Section 11 (d) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms states that each person charged with an offence is to be ‘presumed innocent.
ANATOMY OF A TRIAL Opening Statements -1 st : Plaintiff -2 nd : Defendant Examinations -1 st : Plaintiff Witnesses -2 nd : Defendant Witnesses Closing.
CHAP. 8: IMPEACHMENT of WITNESSES
“ Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2008 Criminal Evidence Chapter Eight: Witnesses This multimedia product and its contents are protected under copyright law.
CJ305 Criminal Evidence Welcome to our Seminar!!! (We will begin shortly) Tonight – Unit 9 (Chapter 12 – Documents and the Right of Discovery) (Chapter.
CHAP. 8: IMPEACHMENT P. JANICKE Chap Impeachment2 DEFINITION AND METHODS IMPEACHMENT IS THE PROCESS OF ATTEMPTING TO WEAKEN THE PERCEIVED.
Motions at the Beginning of a Trial Crown and Defence may present motions to the judge Stay of Proceedings (motion to stop the trial) Only judge has authority.
Legal Studies * Mr. Marinello ARRESTS AND WARRANTS.
PROCEDURES IN THE JUSTICE SYSTEM, 8 th ed. Roberson, Wallace, and Stuckey PRENTICE HALL ©2007 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ
CJ305 Criminal Evidence Welcome to our Seminar!!! (We will begin shortly) Tonight – Unit 3 (Chapter 5 – Witnesses -- Lay & Expert) (Chapter 6 – Credibility.
HEARSAY! BY MICHAEL JOHNSON. COMMON LAW DEFINITION “ An out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted”
Attorney/Judge. The purpose of opening statements by each side is to tell jurors something about the case they will be hearing. The opening statements.
Mock Trial Rules of Evidence Arkansas Bar Association Mock Trial Committee Anthony L. McMullen, J.D., Vice Chair ( )
The defendant’s formal answer to a charge: guilty, innocent, or nolo contendere (“I do not contest”).
Impeachment 证人弹劾.
Arizona High School Mock Trial
WHAT IS EVIDENCE TESTIMONY OF WITNESSES DOCUMENTS
Class ended with this question:
Impeachment James Harris Sanaz Ossanloo Law 16 Professor Jordan
CHAP. 8: IMPEACHMENT of WITNESSES
Legal terms.
CHAP. 8: IMPEACHMENT of WITNESSES
OBJECTIONS.
How Witnesses are Examined
Who may impeach a Witness
THE TRIAL IN CANADIAN COURTS – Part 2
Character Evidence Rules - In General
Objections How, when, why…...
Critical Thinking in Test Taking
CHAP. 4, part 1 of 2: DEFINITIONAL EXCEPTIONS TO THE MEANING OF HEARSAY P. JANICKE 2011.
CHAP. 8: IMPEACHMENT P. JANICKE 2010.
THE TRIAL IN CANADIAN COURTS – Part 3
CHAP. 8: IMPEACHMENT of WITNESSES
Presentation transcript:

What is impeachment? Do Now: What do you think the legal definition of impeachment is? Answer: Process of destroying the credibility of a witness.

5 main ways to Impeach 1. Attack character (show past crimes, past bad acts or bad reputation). 2. By showing a prior inconsistent statement by W. 3. By showing that the witness is biased 4. By showing that the W has sensory or mental defect 5. Introducing other evidence that contradicts W’s testimony. *Note – pursuant to FRE, a lawyer can impeach her own witness if (1) surprise testimony; (2) hostile witness

Impeachment by Prior Criminal Conviction 1.Crimen falsi – if a crime included as an element of dishonest or false statement, it may be used to impeach W. 1.Examplesl perjury, false statement, fraud, embezzlement 2.Felony: 1.Only applies to criminal defendant 2.Not involving dishonesty or false statment 3.Only applies if the court determines the “probative value of admitting this evidence outweighs its prejudicial effect on the accused.” 4.**above rule only applies to a witness who is a criminal defendant. FRE 403 applies instead, which allows prior conviction to be excluded only if the person opposing the introduction shows that the convictions probative value is “substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejiduce.” 3.Misdeamor 1.Not involving dishonesty or false statement may not be used at all

Impeachment by prior bad acts Generally permissable although they have not lead to a conviction. However, must be probative of truthfulness. Cannot be asked about arrests. No extrinisic evidence: must be introduces solely through cross-examinatio

Essential Questions: What are the 5 main ways to impeach a witness? What is the rule with prior convictions? What is the rule with prior bad acts?