Posted on 06/19/2009 10:02:59 PM PDT by Steelfish
They should not be allowed nor should they be allowed to wear them when taking a drivers license picture.
NO!
I think the proper way to handle this is to let the witness wear the niqab. But if her face is covered and the jury (or judge, if there is no jury) feels that they cannot judge the credibility of her testimony, they should feel free to reject her testimony in its entirety. While they can already do that, the niqab would cast doubt upon their testimony in many people’s minds and they should be aware of the damage it could do to their credibility as a witness.
It’s difficult for a fact-finder to judge the demeanor and weigh the credibility of a witness when her face is a piece of cloth. Such testimony would be a waste of time — I would probably give it little or no weight.
6th A allows a defendant to confront a prosecution witness. I think this most definitely won’t be allowed in a criminal case.
If the 10 commandments can’t be in the court room...... they damn sure better not allow religous Niqabs either!!
And Judges shouldn’t be allowed descretion either, since they have no descretion with the 10 commandments!!
But I don’t expect equal treatment anymore in this country.
Absolutely not!
Two members of the Michigan Supreme Court voted to allow people to testify in court wearing masks.
And there was just one extra judicial vote on the MA and CA Supreme Courts to legalize Gay & Lesbian marriages!
Nice work. Thanks for the pic post! I’d like to wear one for Halloween.
Not to defend those that want to wear a tent to court but, the wearing of Niqabs still allows a defendant to confront a witness, just cant see her face.
Agreed, but as post 13 points out, it does not prevent the defendant from confronting the witness. As for the jurors, if someone testified wearing a niqab, it would be quite reasonable to ignore their testimony. Who is really under that niqab? Why are they saying what they are saying? What is their motivation for testifying in the way they are? Their testimony might be rendered worthless by their insistence on covering their face.
Thank you! lol
Not to place to fine a point on this. But if a criminal defendant cannot expose the witness’ demeanor as an integral part of cross-examination, then the witness’ entire testimony may have to be dismissed and, since this is a constitutional right (unlike in civil cases), the charges themselves would have to be dropped.
I’ve always found it troubling that judges pass judments based on things like demeanor and appearance.
I don’t see any good reason why they need to do as they do, but if you have one, let me know.
If the case is criminal and there are other witnesses not insisting on a niqab, the prosecution may still be able to make a case based on the other’s testimony. If the niqab witness is the only witness or is critical to the case, the case may fall apart right there. It may never get to jury deliberations.
Another thought: if women can claim the wearing of niqabs in court due to religious beliefs, shouldn’t men be able to do the same? Imagine if the defendant, both lawyers and the judge all wore niqabs. And don’t forget the jury, either.
Bill O’Reilly has a regular segment on body-language and I believe a “science” of this has developed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.