Witness statements

Should a witness be able to read their Garda statement before a trial, before giving testimony or is this not a done practice?

Peregrinus

Deleted User wrote: »

Should a witness be able to read their Garda statement before a trial, before giving testimony or is this not a done practice?

It's not done. The witness's testimony at the trial should be based on their recollection of the events they witnessed, and not on an account of what they said about those events to a third party at a later date. If witnesses read their statements just before testifying, there is a natural tendency to give evidence which will confirm the statement.

Peregrinus

Peregrinus wrote: »

It's not done. The witness's testimony at the trial should be based on their recollection of the events they witnessed, and not on an account of what they said about those events to a third party at a later date. If witnesses read their statements just before testifying, there is a natural tendency to give evidence which will confirm the statement.

Which is what I thought. Even if there's no real difference from them making notes themself and reading that pre-trial.

Was curious given the time lag between events and trials and witness memory.

Peregrinus

In general a witness can only consult notes to refresh his memory if he made the notes himself, and if he did so at the time of the events concerned, or very shortly afterwards. (A "witness statement" is not a note made by the witness; it's a note made by a guard who has interviewed the witness.)

This, incidentally, is why all guards have standard-issue notebooks, and are scrupulous in filling them out as they go. Even then, they have to ask permission of the court before consulting their notebooks when giving evidence, and the defence can object if they think the notes were not made contemporaneously, or may have been tampered with after having being made. (This is the kind of thing that gives rise to miscarriage-of-justice cases.)

Peregrinus

Peregrinus wrote: »

In general a witness can only consult notes to refresh his memory if he made the notes himself, and if he did so at the time of the events concerned, or very shortly afterwards. (A "witness statement" is not a note made by the witness; it's a note made by a guard who has interviewed the witness.)

This, incidentally, is why all guards have standard-issue notebooks, and are scrupulous in filling them out as they go. Even then, they have to ask permission of the court before consulting their notebooks when giving evidence, and the defence can object if they think the notes were not made contemporaneously, or may have been tampered with after having being made. (This is the kind of thing that gives rise to miscarriage-of-justice cases.)

Which all makes the length of time it takes, for some, cases to go to trial all the more crazy.

Given that eye witness testimony is so flakey, at the best of times, to have potentially years between event and testimony opens up a whole other area of eye witness reliability.

Cheers for confirming what I thought.

Peregrinus

Deleted User wrote: »

Which all makes the length of time it takes, for some, cases to go to trial all the more crazy.

Given that eye witness testimony is so flakey, at the best of times, to have potentially years between event and testimony opens up a whole other area of eye witness reliability.

Yes, but allowing him to consult notes made by a third party, not a witness to the event, would make matters worse, not better. He would just give evidence to confirm the notes.

If he cannot recollect, he should say so. And he should be encouraged to say so.

NUTLEY BOY

Will defence counsel have a copy of a prosecution witness's statement which can be used in cross-examination if there are contradictions between the direct evidence and the contents of the statement made by the witness in question.