The “explosive” evidence that Cassidy Hutchinson presented last week, at the Jan. 6 Committee hearing, would not be admissible in a court of law, whether at a trial or a hearing. She, herself, did not see or hear much of what she testified to.
If someone representing the other side – there is no other side at the hearing – had asked to have her testimony declared inadmissible, the chairman would have had no choice but to throw it out. It was nothing more than a clever stunt to keep the mob from becoming bored – and why these hearings can’t be taken seriously.
No matter how credible the witness, second or third-hand evidence carries no weight in determining the outcome of a trial. It’s part of what the 5th Amendment calls “due process.”
As the plaintiff in a trial in a federal court in February of this year, I learned firsthand the difference between hearsay and admissible testimony. By the way, I prevailed in that trial.
Walter J. Eno
Scarborough
Send questions/comments to the editors.
Success. Please wait for the page to reload. If the page does not reload within 5 seconds, please refresh the page.
Enter your email and password to access comments.
Hi, to comment on stories you must . This profile is in addition to your subscription and website login.
Already have a commenting profile? .
Invalid username/password.
Please check your email to confirm and complete your registration.
Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or login first for digital access. Here’s why.
Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.