Evidence-Wellborn SU2006 Outline

Contradiction simply means offering evidence either

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: ce that impeaches a witness' capacity is NOT collateral. (like bias or interest) o If you ask her these questions, isn't it true you did all these wacko things if she denies it, you don't have to accept it (you can bring in extrinsic evidence!!) o Reason: Like bias/interest this is much more probative for truthfulness if the jury finds that these things are true these are going to have a devastating effect on her credibility unlike the "truthfulness" evidence in Gustafson (might still credit a witness who has had some problems with telling the truth or stealing but when their capacity is completely limited it's totally different.) Main Point here: Evidence of defects in capacity of a witness in not collateral! Can be proved through extrinsic evidence. Don't have to accept a witness' answer that she does not suffer from a psychiatric illness that affects her capacity to tell the truth!! Notes: Distinguish Lindstrom from Sassa: In Sassa the trial court refused to permit cross-examination of prosecution witness about her psychiatric treatment for depression and use of anti-depressive medications following her involvement in a fatal automobile accident This does not bear on capacity!! Has nothing to do w/ whether or not she can be trusted to recall the events correctly!! Note 4: Drug or alcohol use merely because you have b...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 08/28/2008 for the course N 483 taught by Professor Wellborn during the Summer '08 term at University of Texas at Austin.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online