Wordsmith.org: the magic of words

Wordsmith Talk

About Us | What's New | Search | Site Map | Contact Us  

Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3
#117816 12/17/03 09:50 AM
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,027
wsieber Offline OP
old hand
OP Offline
old hand
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,027
In the context of Saddam Hussein's capture I encountered the term hostile questioning at CNN online. I wonder if this is (already) a standard phrase, or if it has been created for the occasion. It sounds more ominous to me than what I suppose it to cover up for..


#117817 12/17/03 02:09 PM
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Well, I can't help you as to what they meant by it; but it sounds similar to hostile witness.


#117818 12/17/03 02:19 PM
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757
M
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
M
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757
> hostile witness

Is that a concept unique to American Justice™?


#117819 12/17/03 02:44 PM
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511
I got sort of a warped kick out of all the military speak I heard on Sunday. One of the best, I thought, was the use of "voluntary human intelligence" for "tip."


#117820 12/17/03 02:49 PM
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,230
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,230
"voluntary human intelligence" should be quite easy to accept. After all, we see plenty of voluntary human unintelligence.


#117821 12/17/03 11:28 PM
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,154
Z
Zed Offline
Pooh-Bah
Offline
Pooh-Bah
Z
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,154
voluntary human unintelligence
Ain't it the truth.


#117822 12/18/03 12:56 PM
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 475
D
addict
Offline
addict
D
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 475
Some examples of doublespeak, with etymologies:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublespeak

collateral damage?
gosh darn that phrase has whipped up some ire online, my favourite however, is the changing of war to defense
http://www.yourdictionary.com/library/drlang008.html
http://www.riprense.com/collateral_lingo_damage.htm
http://carmen.artsci.washington.edu/propaganda/bland.htm

**edit**
SO has just suggested the fiendish changing of buy to own. Sneaky b******s


#117823 12/18/03 01:11 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210
those are great, dody. thanks.



formerly known as etaoin...
#117824 12/19/03 10:08 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,624
Pooh-Bah
Offline
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,624
I allus like the CIA definition of peace - permanent prehostility


#117825 12/19/03 11:31 PM
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Ah, brings to mind those heady days after The Big One, when we were waging the Peace to end all Peace.


#117826 12/20/03 02:08 PM
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
How old ARE you, anyway?


#117827 12/20/03 02:18 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,210
How old ARE you, anyway?

HA!



formerly known as etaoin...
#117828 12/20/03 02:30 PM
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
W
wwh Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
W
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
I'm pretty sure Faldage wasn't even a gleam in his garandfather's eye during WWI, the "War to end all Wars". And "Peace to end all Peace" is a history book title.
Peace to End All Peace
The Fall of the Ottoman Empire and the Creation of the Modern Middle East

Fromkin, David, Edited by Elizabeth Stein.


#117829 12/20/03 10:47 PM
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
How old ARE you, anyway?

Not so old that I've forgotten my history lessons.

Faldage wasn't even a gleam in his grandfather's eye during WWI

My grandfather had already gleamed my father by WWI. My father wasn't quite up to the gleaming stage yet.


#117830 12/21/03 11:25 PM
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 619
G
addict
Offline
addict
G
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 619
hostile witness: Is that a concept unique to American Justice?

Not. English jurisprudence.

Usually you are not allowed to cross-examine your own witnesses because they are considered friendly to your cause.

When the court accepts that the witness you are calling is hostile to your cause, usually because the witness is in the payroll of the other side, the rule against cross-examination is lifted.

Calling a hostile witness is a calculated risk.

The witness may possess critical information which can be extracted under oath which will justify the gamble.

BTW "hostile questioning" refers to the questioning of a "hostile", I believe. It does not describe the nature of the questioning itself.

However "hostile" the questioning of Saddam may be, it will be pampering, cooing and cuddling compared to the grotesque barbarities he practised on his own captives.






#117831 12/22/03 01:02 AM
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
I would have thought that you couldn't cross-examine your own witness, not through judicial fiat, but through definition of the term. The legal definition, per AHD4 is:

To question (a witness already examined by the opposing side).

http://www.bartleby.com/61/29/C0762900.html

This would be the case for a witness called by the opposing side. If you wish to further question your own witness after he has been cross-examined by the opposition it is called redirect examination.

http://www.bartleby.com/61/17/R0101700.html

A hostile witness is one that is unsympathetic to your cause and for whom you get permission from the court to question in a more confrontational manner than is normally allowed. This, at least, is the case in US jurisprudence. Whether the same is true for British jurisprudence I do not know.


#117832 12/22/03 03:00 PM
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 619
G
addict
Offline
addict
G
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 619
Whether the same is true for British jurisprudence I do not know.

Can't speak for U.S. jurisprudence*, but one can cross-examine one's own witness under english jurisprudence if you can convince the court that the witness is "hostile".

Absent that liberty, you would have little opportunity to impugn the witness' testimony if it couldn't be impugned by any other means.

The exception to the rule against cross-examining your own witness is made because the witness isn't really 'your' witness.

You have called the witness because his/her evidence is critical to your case, but the witness is also demonstrably hostile to your case.

Obviously, the other side will never call the witness, knowing the witness would be exposed to cross-examination.

Rules which do not serve the ultimate ends of justice are arbitrary and unjust, I would argue, in any jurisdiction.

Of course, the court can be expected to impose limitations on the right to cross-examine in these circumstances.

*Perhaps I spoke too soon. I just found the following on the Internet.

National Institute for Trial Advocacy
Part 03 - Cross Examining the Hostile Witness
0.75 Hour Credit valid until January 1, 2004
Brought to you by the NITA
Author: Irving Younger
This course has been approved for Credit in the states of Arizona, Missouri, California, New York, and Colorado.

Perhaps "cross-examining the hostile witness" is not an option in every state, tho I can't imagine why any state would preclude the practice altogether.

[BTW I had the pleasure of attending several of Irving Younger's Trial Advocacy symposiums at the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor some years ago.

It was always a fabulous treat to see the great names of American litigation performing their assigned roles on stage.

"Performing" is a word I use quite deliberately because one famous litigator actually insisted that a successful trial lawyer should be a "good actor". I guess we always knew that, but who expected any lawyer to actually admit it, nay, proclaim it as a virtue?]








#117833 12/22/03 03:22 PM
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Rules which do not serve the ultimate ends of justice are arbitrary and unjust

I agree with you completely here.

As far as what constitutes cross-examination, it seems like we're just arguing defintions. Certainly different venues of jurisprudence may have different defintions.


#117834 12/22/03 11:18 PM
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 619
G
addict
Offline
addict
G
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 619
it seems like we're just arguing definitions

Yes and no. There is more than nomenclature involved here, I think.

Whatever you call the method of questioning a hostile witness, it is indistinguishable, in appearance and substance, from cross-examination of an opposing witness.

One may question a hostile witness quite effectively without being "more confrontational".

In fact, a deft cross-examiner may disembowel a witness without the witness being conscious of any confrontation at all.

What makes this possible, of course, is the liberty given to the questioner to question the witness' answers. This is a liberty one does not enjoy with one's own witness [unless that witness is adjudged hostile, of course].

Whatever we name the practice of questioning a hostile witness, the practice differs from cross-examination in name only, not in the practice itself.

If that's what you meant when you said "we're just arguing definitions", Faldage, then I agree with you.


#117835 12/23/03 12:37 AM
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
In USn usage, cross-examination is limited to matters that were covered in direct. If you call your witness and ask about things that were done on the evening of the crime I cannot, on cross, ask about that bank robbery two years ago.


#117836 12/24/03 12:49 AM
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,154
Z
Zed Offline
Pooh-Bah
Offline
Pooh-Bah
Z
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,154
Performing" is a word I use quite deliberately because one famous litigator actually insisted that a successful trial lawyer should be a "good actor". I guess we always knew that, but who expected any lawyer to actually admit it, nay, proclaim it as a virtue?
On TV the other night Jay Leno showed a night school flyer offering "Fiction Writing for Lawyers". He suggested that was redundant.


#117837 12/31/03 01:56 AM
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757
M
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
M
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757
mm, interesting. Another friend with a legal skeleton or two in their closet suggests key features of 'hostile' or 'adverse' witness questioning includes:
1. The ability to ask leading questions
2. The ability to cross-question
(which latter still begs the question but!)

I still do not really know how (if at all) this concept fits into UK practice - and what happens Down Over, guys?


#117838 12/31/03 01:04 PM
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Is cross-question the same as cross-examine?

To ask the question begged.


#117839 12/31/03 03:39 PM
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,439
W
wow Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
W
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,439
Ok, where is our Michigander Sparteye, Esquire?
Today a day you have time to peek in, Ann ?


#117840 01/04/04 10:44 PM
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757
M
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
M
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757
Yes, I think so, if I have understood the distinctions correctly: it suggests a process of enquiry that subjects all answers to continued questioning, without the kind of limitation grapho spelled out above.

It was the point about leading questions being permissable that pertickly innerested me though!

What happens in Oz and Zild and Suth Efrika? or do we all in practice know so little about the bastions of our freedoms?


#117841 01/04/04 10:53 PM
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,230
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,230
Cross-examining etc. in Zild

>do we all in practice know so little about the bastions of our freedoms?

I don't know about y'all, but I must answer the above question in the affirmative. My knowledge of NZ jurisprudence is somewhat less than my experience of writing Sanskrit poetry.



Page 1 of 3 1 2 3

Moderated by  Jackie 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Forum Statistics
Forums16
Topics13,912
Posts229,283
Members9,179
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
Newest Members
TRIALNERRA, befuddledmind, KILL_YOUR_SUV, Heather_Turey, Standy
9,179 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 444 guests, and 3 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Top Posters(30 Days)
Top Posters
wwh 13,858
Faldage 13,803
Jackie 11,613
tsuwm 10,542
wofahulicodoc 10,510
LukeJavan8 9,916
AnnaStrophic 6,511
Wordwind 6,296
of troy 5,400
Disclaimer: Wordsmith.org is not responsible for views expressed on this site. Use of this forum is at your own risk and liability - you agree to hold Wordsmith.org and its associates harmless as a condition of using it.

Home | Today's Word | Yesterday's Word | Subscribe | FAQ | Archives | Search | Feedback
Wordsmith Talk | Wordsmith Chat

© 1994-2024 Wordsmith

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5