Love this! wish he would give examples of the way he examine these type of people

First rate presentation in just over 4 minutes. Bravo!

Thank you ☺️

Thank you for sharing masterful insights. I watched this video a few times and realised I have the 6th edition of Advocacy in Practice, written by J L Glissan, sitting next to me. It is a lovely book(especially the sweet dedication Glissan QC gives to his wife.) Thank you for reprinting the 'comic piece' within the preface. On reading it, I had good hearty laugh, which was sorely needed, as in the present, I can relate to being a 'Family Court ... consumer' (and in being one of those 'more difficult tasks' than not, for the advocates.) Kind regards, Eleonora. Around 0:24 min to 0:33 min 'Completely and utterly thoroughly prepared'? ..... Really? .... should not be a laughing matter ... right now, it is ... lol ... oh dear ...

Most lawyers have never testified. So they only vicariously get a glimpse at the dynamics. Even as role players in mock trials IF they did mock testimony, only gives a small glimpse of the dynamic So, it takes them an appreciable time to understand testimony by professional witnesses eg. experts and law enforcement officers who testify regularly.

...... to a point where the truth is less accepted than it out to be.

@brandondenver4331

5 жыл бұрын

Being honest doesn't rid you of the ability to be incorrect, hence the term "an honest mistake." So it may be the truth, but not the whole truth.

@ibrarahmed8021

5 жыл бұрын

Did not mention honesty. Truth. Truth is less accepted than it ought to be. A big two fingers to Mamma justice.

Here is the crux of the barrister's dilema. A witness who tells the truth can be dangerous therefore they have to be undermined by clever questions and esoteric argument. Defending your case by obfuscating the truth is very thin moral ice.

@seamusandpat

3 жыл бұрын

@Anthony Superior black race Joshua in my practice we practise practising being a practice.

@pippipster6767

Жыл бұрын

You say that. But such cross-examination can be perfectly justified. A completely honest witness can nevertheless be mistaken, classically in an identification case where it is perfectly proper to cross-examine about the circumstances of the purported identification. The honest witness may very well be wrong despite being convinced he is right - and the barrister has to attempt to demonstrate that.

@alexmarsh1839

5 ай бұрын

​@@seamusandpat What do you mean?

James Wong Turc…. Look for this video…. This young defendant definitely had his number. 🤣