Brissac v. Lawrence

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that there are “few media more effec- tive than videotape for allowing the members to answer [the] question” of whether testimony was the result of improper re- hearsal and coaching, “i.e., telling the same story over and over again”
• labeling impeachment by prior inconsistent statement as creating the “spectre” of undue influence that continued through the trial
• giving military judge flexibility in determining a child’s competency as a witness
• Military judge found a four-year old competent despite her affirmative responses were predominantly by nods of her head rather than verbal responses.
• where there are multiple influences, motives, or fabrications alleged, prior statements may rebut some, if not all, charges by party opponent
• prior consistent statement admissible under Mil. R. Evid. 801(d)(1)(B) where defense counsel “raised two separate theories through his cross-examination of mother and child and his argument”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).