As evident, all three cases are characterized by bad faith
What must a person do who has been called to testify as a witness in court: false witness, abstention, absence, declarationsYou have received a letter from a lawyer who don't know, you said that you will have to testify in a case. Are indicated the names of the persons who are making a war in front of the judge, the court, the case number (the so-called"general register"), the day and time of the hearing to which you will have to go. But the letter does not say, nor about what you will be tested, nor what is the object of the cause. That's why you're a bit anxious: afraid to say something too, or is it something less than what the judge or the parties expect to hear you say. Think of the possible repercussions that you may incur in the case of a memory gap: what are the risks if it says something different than the truth, and what if it says"do not remember"and is the scene changes. Also if you use to many lawyers warn in advance the witness that will be called to testify before the judge and read to them the questions that will be asked at the hearing (questions, of the rest, formulated by the same lawyer) to guide them, it is a behavior that is ethically incorrect to that of the legal exercising compulsion or suggestions which are aimed at achieving the depositions complacent. What is forbidden is not the simple conversation between the attorney and the witness (which might well be received at the offices of the attorney for clarification), but the one addressed to obtain a favorable testimony to the thesis of his client. So we talked about already If the lawyer contacts the witnesses and hears them personally. This means that the witness, who has received the letter of attorney, may seek clarification regarding the subject matter of the cause and the depositions relating to them. So in order to warn in case you don't remember anything about, or is ignorant of the facts, the rest is the faculty of the lawyer to waive a witness already cited. You can then do the scene changes, and respond, to every question:"I don't remember"or"I am Not aware of these facts."This is, of course, provided that it is not lies. If, in fact, prove the contrary, the reticence, it is considered false testimony. It can not therefore be punished, the witness who declares in good faith to recall a circumstance, while, instead, the facts have unfolded differently. Prudence, however, wants to avoid prosecution for false testimony, that if you are not firmly convinced of this that is said to work formulas dubitative as for example,"I Remember that - even if I'm not completely sure."or"You spent a lot of time and some details may elude me today, but I just remember that."or"I don't think, at the moment, remember this story, although I could be wrong". We remind you that the false witness, the penalty is imprisonment from two to six years. Since it is a offence prosecuted by the state, it is not necessary that one of the parties complains, already being able to the judge to postpone the proceedings (the minutes of the hearing to the public Prosecutor of the Republic so that to proceed against the false witness. The witness must only state what he has seen with his own eyes, refraining from making personal evaluations (such as for example:"The car of the Guy he had exceeded the speed limit,"or"The employer has behaved in unlawful manner with my colleague because."). We speak of"eye-witness"to this: it is legitimate to say:"I saw the sig. Dude very worried face,"but it is not correct to say"Dude she was sick and suffered from anxiety". A witness must tell only the facts that he knows personally, and not those which have been reported by others. For example, to the question:"you Know if a Guy is not gone to work that day."the heads could not answer"No, there is not gone why so I said the chief of staff", but it should answer rather than"No, you went because, being my companion as well as desks, that very day I saw it and, presumably, therefore, was not in the office."In both cases, the witness that contain personal opinions or facts known by third parties does not imply an impact on the witness, but it does ensure that the declarations could not be taken into consideration by the judge. The witness must not fear accusations of violations of privacy, in disclosing, on the request of the judge, the facts personal others. According to the Supreme court, reveal secrets and facts, personal testimony is not a crime. As mentioned, the witness is not obliged to recall the facts of the case and is therefore not obliged to provide the necessarily of the declarations. He could not remember, even if he attended personally to the scene in dispute. The witness fails to appear at the hearing for a valid reason, not risk anything. However, it should be inform in advance to the lawyer or to the the secretariat of the court. You will need to be able to send a medical certificate or an order of the service of the employer. In this case, the judge will refer the hearing to another date in order to enforce the witness. If, however, lacks good cause, the court may apply the financial penalties (from there one hundred euros) to the witness and to impose the forcible escort of the police. This solution, however, in practice, it is only in exceptional cases and only after several postponements of the hearing. Such measures may, however, be pronounced against the witness appeared only after it is accepted after one hour from the time indicated to him to appear at the hearing. Therefore, the heads are given, approximately, sixty minutes of delay, within which there will be no penalty. The witness is a legal obligation For the employee who is absent from work, by giving them the first news to the employer - is justified. Can, at the very most, ask for a certificate with the clerk of the court to obtain compensation for the working day lost.
Translated, there is no protection for the citizens and businesses. All the so-called guardians of the law, do what they like.
