The Karen Read Trial: Karen Read's Legal Team Accuses A Witness of Perjuring Herself (5/8/24)

Beyond The Horizon

As the fireworks continue in the courtroom in the Karen Read murder trial, the defense continues to attempt to punch holes in the narrative presented by the state and one of the best ways to do that is to attempt to destroy the credibility of the witness.
How would a lawyer attempt to do this?
a lawyer seeking to challenge the prosecution's narrative about the relationship between a witness and a suspect would typically use cross-examination to undermine the credibility or reliability of the witness's testimony. Here's how they might go about it:

1. Establishing the Nature of the Relationship: The lawyer might start by asking the witness about the nature and extent of their relationship with the suspect. They may ask about how often they interact, in what context, and for how long they have known each other. This can help paint a clearer picture for the jury or judge.
2. Questioning the Witness's Bias or Motivation: The lawyer may inquire into any potential biases or motivations the witness might have for either supporting or opposing the suspect. For example, they could ask if the witness has any personal animosity towards the suspect, any financial interests involved, or any other reason that might color their testimony.
3. Highlighting Contradictions or Inconsistencies: If there are any inconsistencies or contradictions in the witness's testimony regarding their relationship with the suspect, the lawyer will likely point these out to the court. This can undermine the witness's overall credibility and cast doubt on their version of events.
4. Presenting Contrary Evidence: The lawyer may also introduce evidence or call other witnesses who can testify to a different version of the relationship between the witness and the suspect. For instance, they might call witnesses who can testify that the witness and the suspect were not as close as claimed, or that their interactions were limited to certain contexts.
5. Challenging the Witness's Perception: The lawyer might challenge the witness's perception of the relationship, suggesting that they may have misinterpreted certain interactions or overstated the significance of their relationship with the suspect.
6. Exploring Other Possible Explanations: The lawyer could explore alternative explanations for why the witness might be presenting a certain version of their relationship with the suspect. This could include factors such as pressure from law enforcement, a desire for attention or recognition, or a misunderstanding of the events in question.

In today's episode, we dive right back into the Karen Read trial and recap what went down in the courtroom on day number five.
(commercial at 6:51)
to contact me:
[e-mail]
source:
Karen Read attorneys accuse paramedic of perjury (lawandcrime.com)