Evidence for criminal charges can come in many different forms. Violent crimes require compelling evidence. Sometimes, there is forensic evidence, such as genetic material or fingerprints, that helps connect a suspect to a crime scene. Other times, there might be security camera footage. In some cases, the state relies on witness statements to build a legal case against a defendant accused of assault or other violent crimes.
Witnesses can identify the person who allegedly harmed someone else. They can provide a timeline for the incident and possibly even offer insight into a person’s mindset during and after a crime occurred. Witness testimony can be a key component of the state’s case.
However, it is not necessarily as authoritative as people might assume. A criminal defense attorney may be able to counter the use of witness testimony with one of the techniques mentioned below or a completely different strategy.
Questioning the witness’s reliability
There are numerous reasons to question the assertions made by an eyewitness in a violent criminal case. Perhaps they have a pre-existing relationship with the defendant, and therefore they may have ulterior motives to lie or exaggerate about what they actually witnessed. Maybe they have mental health challenges or substance abuse issues that raise questions about the accuracy of their recollections.
In some cases, directly benefiting from the state’s prosecution of an individual can raise questions about eyewitness testimony. Confidential informants and jailhouse informants can avoid prosecution or limit the penalties they face in their own criminal cases by testifying against others. They may have an ulterior motive to misrepresent the situation.
Examining issues with eyewitnesses in general
Going after the credibility of an individual witness can seem overly aggressive or even cruel, which might theoretically backfire depending on how the jury interprets the situation. Particularly when there aren’t specific reasons to question an individual witness’s statements, focusing on how unreliable human memory might be a better strategy.
Eyewitness testimony is less reliable than people generally realize. Repeatedly answering questions about the same memories can alter what people recall. Additionally, little details provided by police officers or prosecutors can theoretically impact what a witness eventually says on the stand.
An attorney might be able to raise enough questions about the accuracy and reliability of eyewitness testimony to prevent a conviction. Learning about the state’s case and ways to counter a prosecutor’s evidence can be beneficial for those facing violent criminal charges. Every type of evidence and criminal charge requires a slightly different response during a trial.
When preparing for trial, don’t miss these first steps accused should follow.