Witnessesare a vital element during trial. Their testimonies serve toenlighten the court on where the prosecution or the defendant standsin view of a particular case. The witnesses need to give coherent andconsistent information that can constantly be referred to withoutcontradiction. When the witness gives contradictory information, theyrisk impeachment by the court (Aron et al., 1990).
Inthis particular case, the law enforcement officer has the right tocharge the man he arrested with intoxication charges. On his part,however, the officer did not act ethically when he insulted the manafter he vomited on his pants. This evidence in the hands of thedefendant is reason enough to impeach the officer’s testimony.
Forthe defense team to impeach the officer’s testimony, it has toprovide enough evidence that the officer insulted the man hearrested. This evidence should uphold the requirements needed toqualify the information as criminal evidence (Aron et al., 1990). Theman and his attorney need to provide the incriminating evidence byuse of recorded words directly uttered by the officer. Otherwitnesses who were present when the incident happened can also serveto provide information further to prove the officer was also on thewrong.
Thepresentation of the evidence by the man or another witness is enoughto indicate that the officer did not act legally. The defense canclaim that the officer can be biased in the case because there isalready evidence of previous conflict between the officer and thedefendant. This evidence does not prove that the said officer isbiased neither does it disapprove the possibility of the officerbeing biased (Aron et al., 1990).
Fairtrials require that the officers handling the various cases beimpartial. Any evidence that the officer is partial is a platform forthe defense to propose the impeachment of the officer’s testimony.
Aron,R., Duffy, K. T., & Rosner, J. L. (1990). Impeachmentof witnesses: The cross-examiner`s art.Colorado Springs, Colo: Shepard`s/McGraw-Hill, Inc.