• pyre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      it clearly is, and that’s not why hearsay is inadmissible anyway.

      it’s inadmissible because it can’t be cross examined.

      • Mac@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 months ago

        I think they mean eyewitness testimony. eyewitness testimony is not actually worth anything because people don’t remember things properly and often the brain will make shit up just to fill in the blanks—especially when it matters. I was crossing an intersection once and was five paces away from a serious car accident and I couldn’t even remember which car was coming from which direction. wild.

        • pyre@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          that’s another thing, and partly what cross examination is for, but eyewitness testimony is not inadmissible. in fact many trials have relied on a single eyewitness testimony, and whether the jury believes the witness or not.