The witness, the person who stands up in court and swears under oath that they saw a particular person do a particular thing relevant to a case, offers the judge and the jury not only guidance as to the facts but reassurance too. Reassurance that that there is a factual basis to the case for the defence or the prosecution, reassurance that these not just hot air and empty talk.
Witnesses are a form of evidence and that is a fundamental plank of justice, perhaps the one thing that separates law from tyranny.
Wikipedia defines a legal witness as:
“…someone who, either voluntarily or under compulsion, provides testimonial evidence, either oral or written, of what he or she knows or claims to know about the matter before some official authorized to take such testimony.”
As the entry correctly notes, witnesses may sometimes provide their evidence to the court in written form. However, oral testimony delivered in person remains central to the jury system. The in-person witness dates back to an oral age. In a world in which few people could write personal accounts were the only way to engage the jury in views of guilt or innocence, and that has never really changed.
Of course in the 21st Century an in-person witness may appear via video link from a remote location: an excellent illustration of the ways in which modern technology can blend seamlessly with the time-honoured fundamentals of the court process.
Almost by definition witnesses are visitors to the courtroom. They just happened to be in a certain place at a certain time and see or hear certain things. Now they find themselves caught up in an unfamiliar, even intimidating process full of confusing jargon. One of things the courts excel at is creating the right atmosphere for legal proceedings. In many ways that is vital but it can make the nervous, the tongue-tied or the insecure stumble over their words.
The stakes are even higher when a particular witness gives evidence in their own defence or as part of their action against a third party . The entire case may hang on the quality of their evidence. Just as we judge people to some degree by the way they behave towards us in everyday life, so judges and juries can – and do – draw conclusions about the veracity of witnesses in court by the way they behave on the stand.
“…arrangements to familiarise witnesses with the layout of the court, the likely sequence of events when the witness is giving evidence, and a balanced appraisal of the different responsibilities of the various participants.”
Essentially this means a crash course in being a witness: what to do, how to behave, the kinds of questions to expect and most importantly of all, how to answer those questions.
This kind of training is quite distinct from coaching a witness in what to say or attempting to persuade them to slant it in a particular way. This has always been prohibited by law: the potential for perverting the course of justice is very obvious! The Bar Council guidelines are firm on this point. Great care must be taken, they stress, to say nothing to witnesses in a case that could suggest:
“…what the witness should say, or how he or she should express himself or herself in the witness box – that would be coaching.”
To further avoid the risk of ‘coaching’, the Court of Appeal-approved witness familiarisation process should be conducted by a separate agency and not the particular legal team handling the case in which a witness is set to appear. Similarly, other than public courtroom questions, solicitors and barristers for a particular side in a case are forbidden from talking to a witness in the midst of their evidence. This applies even if the court breaks for lunch or some other recess in the midst of the witness’ time on the stand.
“…careful and thoughtful answers, which were focused on the specific issues about which he was being questioned. At all times, he was concerned to ensure that he understood the precise question, and the precise premise underlying the question which he was being asked.”
This is in spite of giving his evidence in Russian, which then had to be translated into English in the courtroom. Mr Abramovich had undergone witness familiarisation. You may not be surprised to hear that he won the case.
The key to being a good witness is in following Mr Abramovich’s example. Be clear, be concise, stick to the facts – avoid the temptation to elaborate or waffle. Your legal team can tell you what to expect in the courtroom but cannot tell you what to say: that’s up to you. Nevertheless, it is important to be up-front with your legal team about what you intend to say once on the stand. More than once I have seen witnesses return after a recess, forget their discussion with the legal team for their side and blow the case out of the water with some unexpected revelation!
Photo of Leeds Magistrates Court copyright Stanley Walker and licensed for reuse under a Creative Commons licence
Share this post
Get free family law updates
Marilyn Stowe’s new book: expert advice on all aspects of divorce, just 99p!
Divorce & Splitting Up by Marilyn Stowe is the essential how-to book for anyone who is getting divorced or splitting up from a partner. Read more >>
"A must buy that really opens your eyes to what is involved if you are considering or going through a divorce." - Amanda Brown
"This will answer your questions in a way that non-lawyers can understand." - Miss P.
"Don't get divorced without it. I read this book despite being divorced for more than 10 years. I wish I'd had this book to hand at the time. Great examples, simple to read and understand." - Jamie
"This really has helped me to see that there is light at the end of the tunnel and I will come out of it a stronger person." - J
Marilyn Stowe on SKY News & ITV This Morning
- Paul on My review of the year (part three) by John Bolch
- Yvie on Father faces further delay in 12 year-old contact case despite High Court victory
- Paul on English family law à la française by guest blogger Melanie Bataillard-Samuel
- JamesB on English family law à la française by guest blogger Melanie Bataillard-Samuel
- Adrian Bathurst on Father faces further delay in 12 year-old contact case despite High Court victory
Subscribe & Follow
In the Media
Marilyn Stowe is the senior partner in Stowe Family Law, which has offices in Yorkshire, Cheshire and London. With more than 30 years’ experience handling divorce cases and family law proceedings she is regarded as one of the most formidable and sought after divorce lawyers in the UK. In 2012, Marilyn became one of the first solicitors to qualify as a family law arbitrator.
All persons mentioned in the scenarios are fictitious: details have been deliberately changed in order to protect identities and other confidential circumstances of my clients. All advice and information on this blog including posts written by guest authors, is given only as a general guide to the operation of the law on the date of publication. Readers must place no reliance whatsoever on the content of this blog and must always obtain their own legal advice. Marilyn Stowe, Stowe Family Law LLP and guest authors accept no liability whatsoever arising as a result of reliance upon its content.
Contact Stowe Family Law
These downloads accompany Marilyn Stowe's latest book: Divorce & Splitting Up: Advice From a Top Divorce Lawyer. After opening, right click to save to your computer.
For more free downloads, visit the Downloads section.