4 ms·
>Be careful, this is hearsay and not evidence. I think you are out of your element. To my understanding hearsay refers to a claim made by someone not in court.
by TZubiri 2y ago
>Be careful, this is hearsay and not evidence.
I think you are out of your element. To my understanding hearsay refers to a claim made by someone not in court. In this case the girlfriend and jailmate were called as witnesses and gave testimony in court.
Witnesses are evidence and they are one of the oldest forms of evidence, your view that evidence is only material is a gross misunderstanding of trial procedures.
- twojacobtwo 2y agoHere's a more thorough definition: > Evidence that is not within the personal knowledge of a witness, such as testimony regarding statements made by someone other than the witness, and that therefore may be inadmissible to establish the truth of a particular contention because the accuracy of the evidence cannot be verified through cross-examination. Tying the two together, basically it would be anything that can't be verified (in court) by the one who the witness is 'quoting'. Regarding witness testimony, I don't think the tradition of it makes it any more iron clad. We used to have a lot more testimony of sorcery and such as well that got people killed. Further, we have only recently begun to study it scientifically. From what I gather, from my very limited knowledge of the studies thus far, it doesn't look good for eye-witness accuracy in general.
- TZubiri 2y agoThat's a take, but it's far from reality. Witnesses are a central evidence in most cases. When the parties are present for cross examination it's not hearsay.
- twojacobtwo 2y ago> When the parties are present for cross examination it's not hearsay. That's exactly what I just said.