Abstract
Since the 1700s, lawyers have controlled interactions with witnesses in court. In England and Wales, witness familiarisation, endorsed in R v Momodou [2005],1aimed to demystify the process and through practical guidance assist witnesses to give their best evidence in legal proceedings, with the result that they are less likely to be confused, misled or unduly influenced by the process of cross-examination. This paper outlines empirical research which indicates that familiarisation can be helpful; though it argues that justice systems should develop best practices for the elicitation of accurate evidence and not leave it to witnesses to combat the system’s shortcomings. Given that this is particularly acute for vulnerable witnesses (and familiarising witnesses to cross-examination is in its infancy), the paper draws attention to R v Lubemba [2014],2which suggests that there is no right to put a case to a witness in child cases. The article also discusses witness approaches in the context of the right to challenge concept.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
