Fact witnesses are often closely related to the case in some way. Fact witnesses, or lay witnesses, testify about their firsthand knowledge: what they heard, saw, said, or did. Generally speaking, the law divides witnesses into two categories: Fact Witnesses and Opinion Witnesses. Therefore, understanding the potential hurdles for admissibility and disclosure is essential. The court held that the agent lacked the knowledge necessary to support a lay witness opinion under Federal Rule of Evidence 701(a).Īs demonstrated by the differing results reached by federal courts even in similar cases, questions about lay versus expert witness testimony don’t always have ‘black or white’ answers. 2013), the Sixth Circuit reversed the trial court’s decision to allow an FBI agent to testify as a lay witness about words spoken during phone calls between the defendants.
#Legal definition of expert witness code
2011), the Eleventh Circuit treated the lay witness testimony admissibility requirements broadly, allowing an FBI agent to testify as to the meaning of certain alleged code words in Arabic spoken by the defendants, even though the agent did not speak Arabic.īy contrast, in US v. When a person answers questions under oath during a deposition or trial, the person is generally referred to as a “witness” and their statements as “testimony.” Yet whether the person is categorized as a lay witness or an expert witness has a profound effect on which testimony is permissible and under what circumstances.įurthermore, the line between “lay” and “expert” witnesses and testimony varies among jurisdictions.
0 kommentar(er)
