eeing their evidence "stricken from
the record."
One of the ladies referred to testified as follows:
"Can you identify that diamond?"
"I am quite sure that it is mine:"
"How do you know?"
"It looks exactly like it."
"But may it not be a similar one and not your own?"
"No; it is mine."
"But how? It has no marks."
"I don't care. I know it is mine. I SWEAR IT IS!"
The good lady supposed that, unless she swore to the fact, she might
lose her jewel, which was, of course, not the case at all, as the sworn
testimony founded upon nothing but inference left her in no better
position than she was in before.
The writer regrets to say that observation would lead him to believe
that women as a rule have somewhat less regard for the spirit of their
oaths than men, and that they are more ready, if it be necessary, to
commit perjury. This may arise from the fact that women are fully aware
that their sex protects them from the same severity of cross-examination
to which men would be subjected under similar circumstances. It is today
fatal to a lawyer's case if he be not invariably gentle and courteous
with a female witness, and this is true even if she be a veritable
Sapphira.
In spite of these limitations, which, of course, affect the testimony
of almost every person, irrespective of sex, women, with the possible
exception of children, make the most remarkable witnesses to be found
in the courts. They are almost invariably quick and positive in their
answers, keenly alive to the dramatic possibilities of the situation,
and with an unerring instinct for a trap or compromising admission.
A woman will inevitably couple with a categorical answer to a question,
if in truth she can be induced to give one at all, a statement of
damaging character to her opponent. For example:
"Do you know the defendant?"
"Yes, to my cost!"
Or
"How old are you?"
"Twenty-three,--old enough to have known better than to trust him."
Forced to make an admission which would seem to hurt her position, the
explanation, instead of being left for the re-direct examination of her
own counsel, is instantly added to her answer then and there.
"Do you admit that you were on Forty-second Street at midnight?"
"Yes. But it was in response to a message sent by the defendant through
his cousin."
What is commonly known as "silent cross-examination" is generally the
most effective. The jury realize the difficulties of the situati
|