Definition of 'hostile witness' #CJontrial #CoronaTrial

By -

A hostile witness is a witness in a trial who testifies for the opposing party or a witness who offers adverse testimony to the calling party during direct examination.

A witness called by the opposing party is presumed hostile. A witness called by the direct examiner can be declared hostile by a judge, at the request of the examiner, when the witness' testimony is openly antagonistic or clearly prejudiced to the opposing party.

A party examining a hostile witness may question the witness as if in cross-examination, thus permitting the use of leading questions. A hostile witness is sometimes known as an adverse witness or an unfavorable witness.

Source: Wikipedia.org

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular this week

Reporters Karen Lema and Manuel Mogato of @Reuters LIED about the Duterte "Hitler" quote

By -
Image
The oh-so-noble journalists are at it again, this time, with Duterte’s Hitler comment. I am no Duterte fanatic. I criticize him more scathingly than anyone when his mouth is out of line. But this time, Duterte really didn’t say anything wrong. The real culprits behind the fuss over his Hitler comment are Karen Lema and Manuel Mogato, two Filipino reporters of the Reuters news agency, who wrote this article: “ Philippines’ Duterte likens himself to Hitler, wants to kill millions of drug addicts ”. Lema and Mogato are Filipinos. There’s no way they could have misunderstood what Duterte really meant in his speech. I watched the video and this is what the President said: “Hitler massacred 3 million Jews. There are 3 million drug addicts. I’d be happy to slaughter them. At least, if Germany had Hitler, the Philippines would have ….. my victims, all criminals, to finish a problem of my country, and save the next generation.” (See for yourself here . The Hitler part is at 14:40....
Read more

Jose Rizal never had Tagalog in mind when he encouraged us to love our own language

By -
Image
Posted by a certain Chloe Santiago on the Facebook GRP Community Group : Jose Rizal died in 1896 and Tagalog was declared the official language of the Philippine only in 1937. This can only mean that Rizal wasn't really talking about Tagalog when he made this statement: "He who does not love his own language is worse than an animal and smelly fish." Indeed. Who made the arbitrary directive to make the Tagalog dialect the "National Language" to begin with? Furthermore, why have a "National Language" when Filipinos are already proficient in the global lingua franca of commerce and scientific achievement?
Read more

Election cheating persists in the Philippines because of the prohibitive cost of electoral protest

By -
Image
Electoral sabotage is a crime not only against a losing candidate but against the voters. A cheated candidate also means a cheated electorate. Thus, I find it hard to fathom why the cost of electoral protest is so prohibitive and has to be shouldered by the protestant. This effectively prohibits those without money to wage a protest. I also could not understand why it should take a long time.  What good is a protest if it gets resolved only days before the next election. This is one area for electoral reform that can be a disincentive for cheating. Make the cost affordable, if not free. And make the process speedy. And jail the cheats and disqualify them from holding future office. And have them refund the state all their salaries and benefits during their undeserved term. And it would also help if anyone who benefits from fraud is presumed to have knowledge of the act and tolerated it, and has the burden to prove otherwise. Senator Nancy Binay what do you think Madam. Can ...
Read more

What does 'a state of lawlessness' mean for the Filipino?

By -
Image
According to Ranhillo Aquino-Callangan, Dean of the San Beda Graduate School of Law, in a Facebook post ... A STATE OF LAWLESSNESS  Nothing alarming, but neither is it legally insignificant.  1. It is a declaration by the Chief Executive that there is notable lawlessness in the country.  2.  It lays down the premise for the exercise of the "calling out" power: Article VII of the Constitution allows him to call out the armed forces to suppress "lawless violence".  The result is that law-enforcement is not left only to the police but is entrusted to the Armed Forces who will assist the police in quelling mayhem.  3.  It is a signal to the Legislature that he may ask for emergency powers.  Are checkpoints allowed?  Even without a declaration of a state of lawlessness, they are allowed.  Only that their usefulness becomes more urgent now.  Does that allow police officers to search so thoroughly that they can forcibly o...
Read more