Would I be allowed to imply that a witness did it because of a witness past Like my case is on plagiarism can I ask a witness on cross if witness has ever plagiarized(he has) to imply that he would do it again
Plagiarism is an interesting case because it's an act of dishonesty, which means asking about it affects the witness's credibility--not necessarily their character. I'd take a look at Rule 608, then talk to your coach.
tysm bro those rules are so weirdly worded
They sound like something an 80-year-old professor wrote!
Would I be allowed to imply that a witness did it because of a witness past
Like my case is on plagiarism can I ask a witness on cross if witness has ever plagiarized(he has) to imply that he would do it again
Plagiarism is an interesting case because it's an act of dishonesty, which means asking about it affects the witness's credibility--not necessarily their character. I'd take a look at Rule 608, then talk to your coach.
What about the exceptions?
I'll cover those in another video down the road!