Federal Court: credibility of a witness in the absence of testimony constant or only one-constant testimony to assess critically 
Federal Court: The credibility of a witness is appreciate in the absence of testimony or even one-constant constant critical statement. The Federal Court in two decisions dealt another statement to the criterion of stability in the assessment of a witness. In the absence of testimony of a witness constant need for a more careful assessment of evidence. An evaluation of the evidence is insufficient if the chamber knowing its findings solely on the information of a witness support, the behavior has changed his testimony in essential points. Statements always require an appraisal in such a way that the origin of every detail of the witnesses and their respective contents are set out in detail, and above all - with particular Into account by the witness for that statement changes the statements - is to be discussed, will be followed for any reason any of the crime. Here the decision of the Supreme Court of 18.11.2010 is - 2 StR 497/10 reading. Constance statement is with only one single statement to the police not only sound basis for a conviction. A conviction for aggravated sexual abuse of children is wrong in law if the verdict reasons not contain sufficient discussion of the credibility of the victim and the sentence is based essentially on the testimony of Constance. Is it so far but a lack of detail statements he only been made in a single police interview, is such a constant in particular conflicting information from the defendant and the claim that the victim had the charges only because of publicity, for the defendants to frighten, not to be regarded as a sufficient condemnation basis - as the Supreme Court in Decision of 10.11.2010 - 2 StR 403/10.
link to the original post:
http://www.drherzog.de/ra6y8j2 Written by
lawyer Dr. jur. Marc Duke
areas of law: Criminal Law
,
Tags:
lawyer, law, lawyer, Rosenheim, criminal law,
0 comments:
Post a Comment