What is the major rule of attacking the credibility of your witness?
You can't engage in general attacks on the character of your own witness.
You can only attack the credibility of your witness if a prior inconsistent statement made by them exists.
You can only attack their character if they are hostile.
What is hostility at common law?
When a witness is attempting to sabotage the case of the party that called her.
When a witness is not giving evidence fairly with a desire to tell the truth because of a hostile animus toward the party that called her.
When a witness gives evidence inconsistent with that which she has already given.
What is the consequence of a finding of hostility?
Counsel can ask questions about the prior inconsistent statement.
Counsel can cross examine the witness at large.
Counsel can impeach the trustworthiness of the witness.
A witness who meets with the Crown just before trial for an extended period of time but doesn't advise of any problems can be treated as hostile.
The Canada Evidence Act s. 9(1) holds that you can cross examine the witness regarding...
Inconsistencies in recorded statements.
Inconsistencies in written statements
Inconsistencies in oral statements.
What is an adverse witness?
One who is unfavourable because she takes a position opposite to that of the party calling her.
One who takes a position inconsistent with a more favourable position for the party caller her than she held earlier.
One who says something obviously unreliable in support of the party calling her.
R v Figliola (2011 ONCA) holds that in order to cross examine under CEA s. 9(2), counsel must show that...
There is a recorded inconsistency that is harmful to the party calling the witness.
There is an inconsistency that is harmful to the party calling the witness.
There is a written inconsistency between the testimony at trial and the written statement.
R v Broyles stands for the proposition that...
Counsel cannot discuss prior convictions of their own witness until after cross examination.
The rule against asking leading questions during examination in chief is very strict, even during the introduction.
When introducing a witness, counsel cannot bolster character to the point that doing so becomes the dominant object of the introduction.
According to R v Brooks, a warning about credibility must be given when
There is concern about credibility
The testimony is important to the Crown's case
All of the above
According to R v Khela, which of the following is NOT an element of the warning that should be given to jurors where the guilt of the accused rests on the testimony of a single doubtful witness?
Drawing the attention of the jury to the evidence requiring special scrutiny.
Explaining why the evidence needs special scrutiny.
Cautioning the jury that it is dangerous to convict on unconfirmed evidence of this sort, but that they can.
Informing the jury that the persuasive burden is increased in cases resting on a single doubtful witness.
That the jury should look for evidence from another source showing that the untrustworthy witness is telling the truth.
