Webto provide credible testimony to establish his eligibility for asylum and withholding of removal. Petitioner offered inconsistent testimony on three separate issues. Those inconsistencies provided substantial evidence to support the adverse credibility determination. First, Petitioner gave inconsistent testimony relating to the day, month, and WebJan 12, 2024 · Harris’s trial testimony was both an “‘impossible to square’ and materially inconsistent version of events compared to his prior written statement.” Id. at 27. As it …
WHEN DURING CROSS DO YOU IMPEACH WITH A PRIOR …
WebApr 12, 2024 · App. 1993), where our court found the testimony of three sexual abuse victims was insufficient to support the conviction as a matter of law because “[w]hen read separately or together, the accounts of alleged abuse are inconsistent, self-contradictory, lacking in experiential detail, and, at times, border on the absurd.” WebMar 18, 2024 · The decision of where in a cross-examination to place an impeachment-by-inconsistent-statement is a function of four variables: The significance and detrimental … Written for economists, the classic THINKING FAST AND SLOW by Daniel … Temple Law, the plaintiffs’ Bar, and many of the finest advocates mourned the recent … The Realm of Junk Science Search the internet, and you can find links to articles … The Realm of Junk Science Search the internet, and you can find links to articles … Temple University Beasley School of Law hosted this online advocacy training … Professor Margaret Bull Kovera, a nationally-regarded research … For Philadelphia citizens returning from incarceration, unresolved traffic fines … impactkeshu
Comment to the Department of Energy: Proposed Rule on Energy ...
WebJul 24, 2009 · T he prior inconsistent statement. Most cross-examiners love prior inconsistent statements. If you were to create a “top ten” list of methods for impeaching … WebTo be inconsistent, a prior statement must either directly contradict or be materially different from the expected testimony at trial. The inconsistency must involve a material, significant fact rather than mere details. ‘Nit-picking’ is not permitted under the guise of prior inconsistent statements. impact now church