Unit 4: Selection and Crime Scene Process
At Trial
At the trial the officer should:
1. Wear a suit and tie or clean uniform. Some courts do not allow law enforcement officers to wear uniforms. The officer should, therefore, ask the prosecutor what type of clothing is permissible.
2. Attempt to testify from his memory about the facts of the case. If the officer does recall certain details, such as the precise time of the event or the exact length of a particular mark or the vehicleor weapon identification number, when asked by the prosecutor he should tell the prosecutor that ifhe could review his police report it might refresh his recollection. The officer should leave copies of his reports at the prosecutor’s table in the courtroom so that they will be available in the event that heneeds them. Once the officer has had the opportunity to refresh his recollection, he should answer thequestion and continue to testify based upon his memory, not the police report.
3. Speak slowly-clearly-distinctly. A great deal of potentially valuable testimony is of no value in court because it cannot be heard by the judge or the jury.
4. Be prepared to demonstrate what he observed the defendant do, for example, the manner in which he preformed balance and coordination tests on a DWI (Driving While Intoxicated) stop. The officer must be prepared to identify physical evidence and diagrams and to explain what he observed at a crime scene to the jury using the physical evidence and diagrams.
5. Always wait until question has been completed before giving his answer. If the question is objectionable, the delay will provide the prosecutor an opportunity to raise an objection with thecourt. Further, the court reporter can only record one person’s words at a time. The officer should speak to the trier of fact; that is the jury in a jury trial or the judge in district court or at a preliminary hearing such as suppression hearing in superior court.
6. Listen carefully to each question. If the officer doesn’t understand the question, he should say so. The officer should not guess at what the questioner is asking.
7. Beware of yes and no questions. While it is permissible and appropriate for the defendant’s attorney to ask questions that call for yes or no answers, it might be necessary to explain an answer. The officer should answer yes or no and explain the answer. If he is cut off, the prosecutor should givehim an opportunity to respond on re-direct examination. Occasionally on cross-examination, the defendant’s attorney will ask a question that assumes facts that are incorrect. It is incumbent upon theofficer to correct the misstatement in his response. Example Question: “Have you stopped taking illicit drugs on duty?” Appropriate Response: “I never used illicit drugs while on duty or at any time.”
8. Not be a wise guy. Nothing turns a jury or judge against an officer faster than wisecracks or arrogance.
9. Not let the cross-examiner get him angry. If an officer loses his temper, the jury may conclude that he is biased and therefore discount his testimony.
10. Maintain the appearance of an impartial reporter of the facts. Body language is important; the officer shouldn’t slouch, or act disinterested or bored while the defendant’s attorney is cross-examining him.
11. Language. The officer should use everyday words. For example, rather than “subject,” use “defendant” or “Mr. Jones”; rather than vehicle, use “car” or “truck.”
12. Answer questions put by the cross-examiner as briefly and directly possible. Do not volunteer information.
13. Do not guess. When an officer guesses or speculates, he may provide inaccurate information. Admitting that one does not remember is entirely appropriate. Example Question: “Do you mean to say that you can’t remember? Is that what you want the jury to understand?” Appropriate Response: “ I can only testify as to the facts which I remember. I don’t remember the color of the defendant’s pants.” Do not be afraid to say “I don’t know” when that is the case. Exception. In some instances, if the officer has more experience in a particular field than an average person, he may be allowed (after a special ruling by the judge) to testify as to his opinion about certain things, such as speed or whether a hole in a tree is a bullet hole. If the officer is qualified to testify as an “expert,”he should be very careful not to volunteer opinions which are beyond his area of special knowledge.
14. Chain of custody. When the officer’s testimony relates to physical evidence, be prepared to identify the particular piece of evidence, either by a serial number on a gun or some other identifying characteristic. Before introducing a piece of physical evidence, the prosecution must establish a chain of custody. It must trace the piece of evidence from the time of its seizure to the time of its introduction in evidence. If the officer is unable to identify a piece of evidence that came into his possession, there may be a break in the chain of custody and as a result, the court may not permit the item into evidence. The officer should know who gave him the evidence and to whom he gave the evidence, as well as when these transactions occurred.
15. Be aware of court orders regarding the case. In almost every criminal case the court will order that the witnesses be sequestered. This means that after a witness has testified, he may not discuss with other witnesses what happened during his testimony. If a witness violates the court order, he may be stricken, the testimony of the witness he spoke to may be barred, or the court could craft some other remedy. Such a situation would be disastrous for a case and must be avoided by scrupulously following the court’s orders. Similarly, the court may limit the information the jury is permitted toreceive. For example, the judge may conclude that to permit the jury to learn that the defendant hassimilar charges pending in other courts would be more prejudicial than it is probative and order thethe prosecutor not to permit the testimony to be entered into evidence. A witness who places suchinformation before the jury in violation of the court’s order might cause a mistrial or dismissalof the charges.