Character Witnesses

[dkpatton]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Texas

A dear friend on mine has been accused falsely of sexual assault of a minor. They are trying to establish that, as a pastor, he has a pattern of innappropriate behavior with women. For every women that would say he acted innapprpriately, there are 20 reasonably attractive women that would say he never behaved untowardly towards them. The lawyer says the defense cannot present character witnesses until the punishment phase of a trial. Is this correct? It seems terribly unfair!

[OldandTired]

Character witnesses are only for the punishment phase. The trial is the part of this process where the truths are learned, not what kind of person the pastor represents himself to be. The amount of time sentenced to can sometimes be reduced, if the Character Witnesses provide good testimony.

[j991]

Character witnesses are by definition someone brought into the trail to testify to a defendatns overall character. The attorneys can ask such questions as "Did you like the person?, Has he ever done anythihng nice for you?...questions that speak to a persons character. However, during the trial the defense can present witnesses that have knowledge of the persons activities and are associated with the defendant. For example, in your case where the defendant is a pastor, the defense can bring in members from his church. During the trail the defense cannot ask character questions, but can ask specific questions relating to the case. After establishing the ground work of who the witness is, how they know the defendant, etc..the defense can ask the pertinent questions. For example, "Have you ever been assualted or victimized by the def.? Have you ever seen him assault others? Have you ever seen or overheard him in a situation where he stated that he assualted others?, etc. The questions must be limited to any assault the witness saw, heard, or was made against them. These types of witnessess are called "pattern witnesses". They introduce or dispute the stipulation that the defendant has a pattern of abuse.

[cyjeff]

Look at it this way...

For a murder trial, do you really think the defense would be allowed to parade a number of people in front of the jury and say, "Look at all the people that he DIDN'T kill... that has to be worth SOMETHING".

No, not applicable in the trial phase.

[j991]

Originally Posted by cyjeff

Look at it this way...

For a murder trial, do you really think the defense would be allowed to parade a number of people in front of the jury and say, "Look at all the people that he DIDN'T kill... that has to be worth SOMETHING".

No, not applicable in the trial phase.

That's exactly what happens. The prosecution often brings in witnesses that have contact with the defendant to establish a pattern. In a murder trial per your example the questions would be "Did you ever hear the defendant theaten to kill you, the victim, or anyone else?", therefore establsihing the pattern that the defendant has a history of violence. The defense can bring people to testify that they have never heard such statements, refuting the pattern. It is a pretty common tactic.

[cyjeff]

Originally Posted by j991

That's exactly what happens. The prosecution often brings in witnesses that have contact with the defendant to establish a pattern. In a murder trial per your example the questions would be "Did you ever hear the defendant theaten to kill you, the victim, or anyone else?", therefore establsihing the pattern that the defendant has a history of violence. The defense can bring people to testify that they have never heard such statements, refuting the pattern. It is a pretty common tactic.

To a degree.

On the other hand, character witnesses have, oft times, done more harm than good.

You would have to find witnesses that have very similar attributes to the victim(s).

[j991]

Originally Posted by cyjeff

To a degree.

On the other hand, character witnesses have, oft times, done more harm than good.

You would have to find witnesses that have very similar attributes to the victim(s).

Understood, but as I've stated character witness for sentencing, but pattern witnessess okay for trail. Kato Kalin did OJ no good, thats for sure.

[>Charlotte<]

Originally Posted by dkpatton

For every women that would say he acted innapprpriately, there are 20 reasonably attractive women that would say he never behaved untowardly towards them.

And what do you think that would prove? A sexual predator of children doesn't look for attractive women, he looks for vulnerable children.

[dkpatton]

Originally Posted by Clt747

And what do you think that would prove? A sexual predator of children doesn't look for attractive women, he looks for vulnerable children.

I guess I should have clarified. The accuser was 15 or 16 at the time of the "offense." They are also allowing a few women who were adults to testify that he hugged them inappropriately. He is a pastor. He hugs everyone! So the witnesses I was referring to were teenage girls and young women.

btw-thanks for the advice.