It is true that police officers have no stake in the outcome of the case. But they are hardly neutral and disinterested witnesses.
Q: Ms. Jones. You realize that when the police interviewed you, they were wearing body worn cameras? A: Actually I didn’t know that. That’s not something I was aware of.
At a recent trial, I called my client’s mother as our only witness. I regretted this almost immediately. We had interviewed her. We had subpoenaed her. We had prepared her. And I should have left her sitting in the hall outside the courtroom as I rested my case.
“What is your name?” That is a non-leading question. Compare that with “Your name is John Smith, isn’t it?” That would be leading. It basically tells the witness what his answer should be.
A man is charged with soliciting a prostitute. He is a Lyft driver who, on the night in question, drops off a customer in D.C. A female undercover officer approaches the car while he is pulled over. What happens next is contested.
Q. Officer. When you arrived, the altercation was still on-going, right?
A. That’s right.
Q. So you have no idea how it started?
A. No, I don’t.
Q. When you arrived, my client had a bottle in her hand?
Q. And he had a piece of wood in his hand, right?
I like most of the police officers I work with. Access to body worn camera footage has also given me greater respect for what they do: I have seen them deal with volatile and potentially dangerous situations with sensitivity and respect. But this notion of police officers as neutral, disinterested third party observers who testify impartially on behalf of the government is ridiculous. The officers do pick a side – and it is the government’s.
Q: If you lost your body worn camera, you could get written up for that, right? A: Yeah, if you lost it, yes. But in this situation, it was knocked off or fell off, whatever have you –… Read More
It is my Kamala Harris moment. You recall her questioning of Brett Kavanaugh at his confirmation hearing. She sets him up carefully: Q: Judge, have you ever discussed Special Counsel Mueller or his investigation with anyone? A: Well,… Read More
DEFENSE: Before I begin my argument, I’d like to invoke the rule on witnesses. HEARING EXAMINER: The what? The rule on witnesses? DEFENSE: Yes, sir. The sergeant has concluded his testimony. He will be a witness against my client… Read More