Notice to appear as a witness

fritzelly

Was in court this morning as a witness and the defendant never turned up

Just received a call now, from the garda, saying I need to be there tomorrow at 10am

Is there not some kind of minimum amount of notice they have to give?

Peregrinus

No, there isn't. They'll give you advance notice of the date the case is listed to start, but once the case starts you can be required at any point. They'll give you as much notice as they can of exactly when you are required but that's a practical matter, not a legal one. The alternative is to require you to attend at the start of the case and hang around all day, every day, until you have given evidence, but that's not a better alternative from your point of view.

Miike

Nothing to see here

Atlantic Dawn

After that kind of bs I would not appear again unless I legally had to, complete disregard for working people.

Peregrinus

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

After that kind of bs I would not appear again unless I legally had to, complete disregard for working people.

Pretty well everybody involved in the case is likely to be a working person, AD - the plaintiff, the defendant, all the witnesses, the guards, the lawyers on both sides, the judge.

The taxpayer is footing the bill, so things tend to be organised to ensure the most efficient use of the taxpayer-funded resources - the guards, the judge, the courtroom (and, in criminal matters, prison officers and prisons). Ideally, if a case ends earlier than expected, or can't proceed when scheduled for whatever reason, rather than have everyone sitting around twiddling their thumbs they'll start immediately into another case, which means that lawyers, witnesses, etc, do get jerked around at short notice.

You can avoid this by advance-scheduling everything, building ample amounts of downtime into your schedule to cope with contingencies. But the costs of doing so are huge, and I don't know of any court system that operates on this basis.

Guy:Incognito

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

After that kind of bs I would not appear again unless I legally had to, complete disregard for working people.

The op can air his displeasure with the defendant if and when they decide to show up for court.

fritzelly

This is a bit crappy - what if the defendant doesn't turn up again tomorrow/today or should I assume he has been arrested at this point to make sure he turns up

Did try searching online but the closest I could find was in the UK where there is a 3 day notice

Victor

Ask for your expenses (including loss of pay).

Peregrinus wrote: »

The taxpayer is footing the bill, so things tend to be organised to ensure the most efficient use of the taxpayer-funded resources - the guards, the judge, the courtroom (and, in criminal matters, prison officers and prisons).

Eh, no. The courts are very clear that they only consider their own costs and other agencies be damned. This was made very clear when they wanted to move all Dublin cases to the CCJ.

fritzelly

Just to be clear I'm screwed and could be called everyday to appear at 10am, spend the whole day there, nothing happen or the defendant doesn't turn up or anything else, get called the next day and so on

This is ridiculous

Peregrinus

fritzelly wrote: »

Just to be clear I'm screwed and could be called everyday to appear at 10am, spend the whole day there, nothing happen or the defendant doesn't turn up or anything else, get called the next day and so on

This is ridiculous

It's unlikely to pan out that way, fritzelly. The purpose of calling people at short notice is so that you don't call them until you're pretty sure that they are in fact going to be needed. The defendant not turning up on Day 1 was not something that was foreseen, presumably, which is why you were called for that dat. If they are now calling you for tomorrow they likely have Reason To Think That He Will Turn Up, that the trial will proceed and that your evidence will be needed.

GM228

fritzelly wrote: »

Was in court this morning as a witness and the defendant never turned up

Just received a call now, from the garda, saying I need to be there tomorrow at 10am

Is there not some kind of minimum amount of notice they have to give?

As Peregrinus stated, there is no minimum notice to be further called bar the initial summons which requires 3 days notice.

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

After that kind of bs I would not appear again unless I legally had to, complete disregard for working people.

You are legally required to.

fritzelly wrote: »

This is a bit crappy - what if the defendant doesn't turn up again tomorrow/today or should I assume he has been arrested at this point to make sure he turns up

Did try searching online but the closest I could find was in the UK where there is a 3 day notice

The 3 day minimum notice also applies here in criminal proceesings, but only applies to the initial summons only.

Once the proceedings start you are required to attend on any subsequent day that the case has been adjourned to and no further summons or notice period is required for such.

delboythedub

Who would want to be a witness after reading this

Peregrinus

delboythedub wrote: »

Who would want to be a witness after reading this

The reason we have witness summonses at all is because, quite frequently, people don't want to be witnesses.

It's a civic obligation, like paying your taxes and not mowing down little old ladies who are too slow at the pedestrian lights. It's not something you do only if you feel like it.

coylemj

fritzelly wrote: »

This is a bit crappy - what if the defendant doesn't turn up again tomorrow/today or should I assume he has been arrested at this point to make sure he turns up

That's probably what has happened. However what's likely to happen next is that he appears in front of the judge, asks for free legal aid and is assigned a solicitor who asks for an adjournment so that he can organise defence witnesses and/or get a proper briefing from your man.

Given that he didn't turn up, I fail to see why the Gardai are insisting that all of the witnesses show up today at major inconvenience, given the short notice. They should ask for a remand in custody so that they can give the witnesses proper notice - why should everyone else dance to your man's tune?

Peregrinus

Because the trial has been set down for hearing, the prosecution is ready to proceed, and nobody - except the defendant, obviously - wants to faff about any more. And nobody is feeling like indulging the defendant.

Lmklad

Was the OP summonsed? If so obliged to go on the first date and any subsequent date thereafter. If not summoned then it's on the good conscience of the OP. Either way the OP (or their employer) is reimbursed for loss of wages and expenses by the State. The Garda in charge of the case will sort this for you.

fritzelly

Lmklad wrote: »

Was the OP summonsed? If so obliged to go on the first date and any subsequent date thereafter. If not summoned then it's on the good conscience of the OP. Either way the OP (or their employer) is reimbursed for loss of wages and expenses by the State. The Garda in charge of the case will sort this for you.

Yep was summonsed

coylemj wrote: »

That's probably what has happened. However what's likely to happen next is that he appears in front of the judge, asks for free legal aid and is assigned a solicitor who asks for an adjournment so that he can organise defence witnesses and/or get a proper briefing from your man.

Given that he didn't turn up, I fail to see why the Gardai are insisting that all of the witnesses show up today at major inconvenience, given the short notice. They should ask for a remand in custody so that they can give the witnesses proper notice - why should everyone else dance to your man's tune?

That's what I thought it would be like - seems like the scumbags say how it works and everyone organises their lives around them


Appearing tomorrow and told I will be giving evidence - 3 days later, at least I was told by the gard I will be called

Don't even know why I was called as a witness since <description of evidence removed>

Pat Mustard

Note:

fritzelly, I took out your description of the evidence as the matter is still sub judice.