WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE PREQUEL TO THE "ESSENTIAL CHECKLIST"
As part of the “Essential Checklist” series a group considered the issues relating to witness statements. Prior to the checklist it is worth reviewing some of the essential issues relating to the service and preparation of witness statements.
THE ISSUES THE GROUP THOUGHT IMPORTANT
It is probably not surprising that the group was much more concerned with the nuts and bolts of finding a witness; getting a statement; serving it on time and then making sure that the witness got to court.
SOME SURPRISING FACTS AND FIGURES
On a show of hands:
- Virtually everyone in the room had drafted a witness statement.
- Around 15% of those present had actually drafted witness statements in cases which had gone to trial and the witness gave evidence.
- Only one person in the room had been to a course on drafting witness statements (one that I had give).
- Very few had read the rules, practice direction or any of the guidance given in relation to the drafting of witness statements.
I doubt whether this is unrepresentative of the profession as a whole. This shows that, to a large extent, litigators are relying on instinct to draft witness statements. This may not matter if the statements are never tested. However the first time you may find out that your witness statements are not what they should be is when the witness is giving evidence at trial.
OTHER POSTS THAT HELP
There are over a dozen posts on the blog which deal with witness statements (simply search “witness statements” – in the “search this site box on the right hand side). Three, in particular relate to the forthcoming checklist.
Serving witness statements late: an extremely dangerous practice remains one of the most regularly read posts on this blog.
Drafting witness statements: a checklist too important to ignore deals the basic rules relating to the structure of witness statements.
Drafting witness statements and the genius of John Munkman adopts a succinct summary of key points from John Munkman’s book on advocacy.
You asked last night if it would be beneficial for expert witnesses to undergo “training”.
I would be very cautious of going down that route.
Let me try to explain why.
First, I am engaged as an expert by a party or as a joint expert to answer a question or number of questions.
To do that I need to be competent in the topic (s) that I am asked about and, if the answer is not an ‘off the shelf’ response, to know how to tackle the research or calculation to produce the answer. If I can’t answer the question then I am the wrong expert and must say so. As happens from time to time if a question is unanswerable, in my view, then I must say so.
I do not think that a training course would help me with that process.
Second, I need to be able to produce my answers in a form that is intelligible/useful to the parties and the Court.
It takes time and effort to produce a format that works, and as an expert you constantly try to develop and improve the way you present your answers and evidence.
I would be delighted if there was a course that could improve my powers of expression and accelerate the process. I have never ever found one or heard of one. If there was such a course for experts, or lawyers, it would be heavily oversubscribed.
Third, above the points of competence and presentation there is honesty. I have to tell the truth in my answers, and to be try to be fair and thorough.
And I do not see a training course will teach me to do that if that nucleus is missing in the first place.
I am however open to persuasion 🙂