FOR2609
Assignment 2
Semester 2 2024
Unique No: 636945
DUE 16 September 2024
, Question 1: Understanding the Term “Previous Consistent Statement”
A "previous consistent statement" refers to a statement made by a witness before
they testify in court, which aligns with their testimony during the trial. This type of
statement is typically used to bolster the credibility of the witness, especially when
their testimony is challenged as being a recent fabrication or when their credibility is
under attack. The primary purpose of introducing a previous consistent statement is
to demonstrate that the witness's account has been consistent over time, thereby
reinforcing their reliability.
However, it's important to note that the general rule in court is that such statements
are not admissible as evidence of the truth of the content unless certain exceptions
apply. For example, if a witness's credibility is questioned due to alleged recent
fabrication, a previous consistent statement can be admitted to counter this claim,
showing that the witness has maintained a consistent story over time.
Question 2: Opinion Evidence and Its Exceptions
Opinion evidence refers to a witness's beliefs or inferences drawn from facts rather
than direct observations of the facts themselves. Generally, opinion evidence is not
admissible in court because the court relies on objective facts to reach a decision.
The primary concern is that opinions can be subjective and may not accurately
reflect the reality of the situation.
However, there are several exceptions to this general rule:
1. Expert Opinion: Experts in fields such as medicine, forensics, or engineering
can provide opinion evidence based on their specialized knowledge, training,
and experience. For instance, a forensic expert might offer an opinion on the
cause of death in a murder trial.
2. Lay Opinion: Laypersons may offer opinions if they are based on their
perception of events and are necessary to convey their testimony effectively.
For example, a witness might describe someone as "angry" based on their
observation of that person's behavior.
Assignment 2
Semester 2 2024
Unique No: 636945
DUE 16 September 2024
, Question 1: Understanding the Term “Previous Consistent Statement”
A "previous consistent statement" refers to a statement made by a witness before
they testify in court, which aligns with their testimony during the trial. This type of
statement is typically used to bolster the credibility of the witness, especially when
their testimony is challenged as being a recent fabrication or when their credibility is
under attack. The primary purpose of introducing a previous consistent statement is
to demonstrate that the witness's account has been consistent over time, thereby
reinforcing their reliability.
However, it's important to note that the general rule in court is that such statements
are not admissible as evidence of the truth of the content unless certain exceptions
apply. For example, if a witness's credibility is questioned due to alleged recent
fabrication, a previous consistent statement can be admitted to counter this claim,
showing that the witness has maintained a consistent story over time.
Question 2: Opinion Evidence and Its Exceptions
Opinion evidence refers to a witness's beliefs or inferences drawn from facts rather
than direct observations of the facts themselves. Generally, opinion evidence is not
admissible in court because the court relies on objective facts to reach a decision.
The primary concern is that opinions can be subjective and may not accurately
reflect the reality of the situation.
However, there are several exceptions to this general rule:
1. Expert Opinion: Experts in fields such as medicine, forensics, or engineering
can provide opinion evidence based on their specialized knowledge, training,
and experience. For instance, a forensic expert might offer an opinion on the
cause of death in a murder trial.
2. Lay Opinion: Laypersons may offer opinions if they are based on their
perception of events and are necessary to convey their testimony effectively.
For example, a witness might describe someone as "angry" based on their
observation of that person's behavior.
