![]() This shows your seriousness and truthfulness about what you have written. Include your telephone number in case the judge wants to speak with you or has any questions regarding the matter. Let the judge know how the defendant plans to make changes in their life and that you believe that they have learned a valuable lesson. It’s important to be specific and point out how incarceration will affect the defendant’s family, employment and future life. The conclusion of your statement should indicate how incarceration will negatively affect the defendant. It helps to provide specific examples of positive actions they have taken to better themselves or others. ![]() If the defendant took care of a sick relative or is a good provider, this information can be used. If there is other supporting information that portrays the defendant in a positive way, you should include this in another paragraph. Be sure to include names of organizations as well as any other activities where the defendant was a participant. These could be items such as volunteering for the community, working with charitable organizations or coaching young adults. Continue the statement by listing examples of any good deeds that the defendant has completed in the past. This establishes your history and relationship. Begin by telling the judge when you first met the defendant and how long you have known them. The second paragraph should indicate your history with the defendant. By letting the judge know that you are aware of the charges committed by the defendant, it shows that you are still willing to write a good character witness statement for them. You should also indicate that you know the type of charges that the defendant has committed. Let the judge know who you are writing the character witness statement for. Otherwise, you risk clouding your case with arguments about other matters, that actually have little to do with it.Begin the first paragraph with your name and profession. For example, in a fight, the two (or more) parties involved would be the parties to the action. Be sure that the evidence is really relevant and reasonably compelling. Generally speaking, there are four types of applicable witnesses when it comes to prison disciplinary proceedings: 1) Parties to the action: these witnesses generally include those engaged in the alleged misconduct. Evidence that Mr Smith is generally dishonest almost certainly isn’t.Įven when dealing with similar previous events, you should be cautious. For example, in a racial harassment case, evidence that the supervisor, Mr Smith, behaved abusively to another black worker is potentially relevant. The exception is where witnesses can give specific evidence about previous events that follow a similar pattern to the claimant’s case. At best it has no impact at all and it may cause harm, if only by annoying or boring the tribunal. There is no need to abandon this in favour of judging his character witnesses, then using the conclusion on them to judge the litigant.Īpart from anything else, it would quickly become absurd once people began calling character witnesses in support of their character witnesses.įor these reasons, character evidence should not be presented in most cases. So far as it is possible to judge such things from witnesses they will do so with the litigant himself. ![]() But this adds little to what the tribunal will already consider. Then the tribunal would have the opportunity to examine their truthfulness and judgement. This problem might be addressed by calling witnesses to give evidence. So the statements don’t make anyone’s character any clearer. The tribunal, who has never heard of these people before, will have no means of assessing their truthfulness or their judgement. And even a Saint will have a few enemies. Even the most despicable and dishonest man can arrange for half a dozen people to write a few lines saying what a good guy they are. So the character of the parties, good or bad, is important.īut these statements are rarely, if ever, of any use. An important part of the tribunal’s role is to decide who to believe. These tend to be short statements or letters written by people who know the litigant saying, in effect: ‘Mr Smith is a good and honest man, who certainly would / wouldn’t have….’Ī common variation is statements about the other side saying, more or less: ‘Ms Jones is a nasty and dishonest person, who certainly would / wouldn’t have….’ ![]() A lot of litigants present character references to the tribunal. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |