A question about criminal trials

[Alpo]

I'm watching a British murder trial, and all of the witnesses are sitting in another room. So prosecution witness number three doesn't get to hear what number two and number one said. That way what they said won't in any way change his testimony. This makes great sense to me.

 

But that's not how they do it on Perry Mason.

 

So in an American criminal trial, do they keep the witnesses segregated so they cannot hear what previous witnesses testified?

[Creeker, SASS #43022]

To the best of my knowledge; Yes. 

 

I have testified in a few civil trials and I was kept out of the courtroom until my testimony was complete; after I was finished - I was allowed to remain in the courtroom. 

And as I had a financial interest in those cases - I did stay.

[ORNERY OAF]

It's called separation of witnesses , always. To keep them from hearing each other testify

[Cold Lake Kid, SASS # 51474]

I was called in a couple of trials and was kept segregated from the other witnesses even after my testimony.

Both were attempted bribery trials in Canada.

In one, I was allowed to read from my Aid de Memoir, made immediately after the incident in question, in the other, the defense objected and I testified without it.  

[Alpo]

I thank all y'all.

[Muleshoe Bill SASS #67022]

Sequestered, this keeps witnesses from modifying their testimony, based on what another witness states under oath.

[Red Gauntlet , SASS 60619]

Yes, and in civil trials, too.

 

I have experienced some very limited exceptions in civil trials...

[Alpo]

Second question. Once you have testified, do they put you back in the witness room, or can you sit in the courtroom and watch the rest of the trial?

 

Occasionally in a movie or TV show they will recall a witness. And it seems that if they let the witness sit in the courtroom and listen to everybody else, and then they recall him, that kind of defeats the purpose of sequestering him to begin with.

 

In this British movie they sent them back to the witness room.

[Badlands Bob #61228]

They referred to it as the Rule of Sequestration around here.  Or just envolking "The Rule" for short.  Witnesses were instructed by the judge to go outside the courtroom and not talk about the case with other witnesses.  

 

If you are released from your subpoena, you can stay in the courtroom or go home.  The judge will clarify your status as you leave the witness stand.  

[Will Kane]

In Texas, you can request it by "invoking The Rule". I have personally witnessed its effectiveness in trial on a couple of occasions. I was taught it has its roots in the Old Testament Book of Daniel, when the prophet Daniel rescued Susanna from false charges brought by some elders. "Invoking The Rule" in Perry Mason episodes probably would have eliminated one of the major dramatic devices employed during the courtroom scenes.

[Cyrus Cassidy #45437]

It's almost a certainty that a judge will order witness sequestration, exactly how you described.  I have seen one instance in which the defense forgot to ask for it, so the judge didn't order it.  

[Sarge]

Sequestered.  Usually.   Not always.  If an attorney requests witnesses be sequestered, the judge will grant.  

[watab kid]

i think ive watched that one - it crossed my mind at the time to question the approach , then i remembered it was brit law in another time and even tho our laws evolved from this , its never gonna make sense to us , much like the chopping block at the tower and the guillotine in france , there is not much of their law we would find acceptable today - but then we wouldn't accept our Salem trials today either , 

 

but what the heck we are getting to see one president tried for the same crimes that another gets to walk from , our legal systen was established to prevent this yet here we are , looking like a third world country , because third world thinkers have control ,