Description of the legal term Hostile Witness:
A hostile witness, within the context of British jurisprudence, is a witness who demonstrates hostility or antagonism during testimony or one whose testimony on direct examination is contrary to the party who has called them to testify. The concept of a hostile witness is critical as it deals with the credibility and reliability of witness testimony, which is a cornerstone of the British adversarial legal system.
When a witness is declared hostile, it permits the party calling the witness to treat them as if they were a witness of the opposing party. In essence, the counsel may cross-examine their own witness. This involves asking leading questions, which are generally disallowed during direct examination, and is done when it is believed that the witness is not willing to tell the truth or is actively trying to undermine the case of the party that called them.
The designation of a witness as hostile is not taken lightly and typically requires the judge’s permission. The legal team requesting the designation must demonstrate the witness’s hostility or adversarial behavior. This could be through their demeanor, the nature of their testimony, or if they have an interest in the opposing party’s case that could bias their statements. Normally, hostile witnesses are those who have unwillingly been summoned to give evidence, or those who change their story from previous statements.
Once a judge declares a witness hostile, cross-examination tactics can be used. This means counsel can challenge the witness’s testimony more aggressively, implying the witness’s statements may be motivated by deceit, confusion, or malice. The admission of prior inconsistent statements (impeachment) is also more readily facilitated in these circumstances, allowing the legal team to undermine the witness’s current testimony by showing the court that the witness previously said something different.
The handling of hostile witnesses is delicate as it could potentially alienate the jury if done without tact, or it could result in the jury sympathizing with the witness. As such, a barrister must employ strategic questioning and exhibit professional decorum when dealing with such witnesses to maintain credibility with the jury and the court.
Legal context in which the term Hostile Witness may be used:
Consider an instance where a criminal defence attorney calls a key witness, someone who had initially provided a statement that seemed to support the alibi of the defendant. However, once on the stand, the witness becomes elusive, provides vague answers, and starts contradicting their earlier statement. In such a case, the defence attorney may request the judge to declare the witness hostile to enable a more rigorous cross-examination. This may involve presenting earlier recorded statements to the witness, questioning the truthfulness of their current testimony, and pressing the witness on reasons for their sudden change in testimony. It’s a strategic move to salvage the credibility of the alibi and to demonstrate to the jury that the witness’s testimony is not reliable.
Another example might be in a civil case where an employee is suing their employer for wrongful dismissal, and a co-worker is called to testify regarding the behavior of the employee. If the co-worker becomes evasive, appears to collude with the employer, or demonstrates animosity towards the plaintiff, their testimony may be compromised. The plaintiff’s counsel could then ask the court to treat the witness as hostile to enable a more confrontational approach, potentially revealing biases or motives for the co-worker’s testimony that differs from their pre-trial statement, thus bolstering the plaintiff’s case.
Understanding the term hostile witness is pivotal for legal practitioners and law students alike as it impacts the manner in which a witness’s testimony is elicited and challenged in court. Proper usage of the designation can mean the difference between a witness’s evidence being rejected or accepted by the judge and jury, making it an important tactical consideration in British legal proceedings.