Alpo Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 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? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Creeker, SASS #43022 Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORNERY OAF Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 It's called separation of witnesses , always. To keep them from hearing each other testify Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cold Lake Kid, SASS # 51474 Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alpo Posted February 12 Author Share Posted February 12 I thank all y'all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muleshoe Bill SASS #67022 Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 Sequestered, this keeps witnesses from modifying their testimony, based on what another witness states under oath. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Gauntlet , SASS 60619 Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 (edited) Yes, and in civil trials, too. I have experienced some very limited exceptions in civil trials... Edited February 12 by Red Gauntlet , SASS 60619 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alpo Posted February 12 Author Share Posted February 12 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badlands Bob #61228 Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Kane Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyrus Cassidy #45437 Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted February 12 Share Posted February 12 Sequestered. Usually. Not always. If an attorney requests witnesses be sequestered, the judge will grant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watab kid Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 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 , Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.