Well, she’s not just an average citizen. She’s a firefighter so she’s used to being in high stress situations to say the least. She also may testify in court at times as part of her job. LE, medics, firefighters testify all the time. My point is it is fair to hold her to a different standard of professionalism. This may be her first time testifying but it’s certainly possible it won’t be her last as a firefighter.
Obviously this event was traumatizing and stressful and no one can deny that. Judge Cahill gave her a lot of latitude. He’s been very attentive with everyone in that courtroom and makes sure witnesses and jurors especially feel comfortable. He’s one of the most attentive judges I’ve seen.
It’s ok for her to be emotional. But she wasn’t answering the questions and was being argumentative. It was explained to her to wait for the question and give yes or no answers. She ignored that polite admonishment. She wanted to advocate for a certain perspective but that’s not her job as a witness. She got progressively argumentative. And then got got snippy with the judge too. She obviously got a lot wrong about the scene, which is normal as a bystander but she didn’t want to acknowledge that. Nelson quoted the times medics were called from the CAD report and she flat out said she didn’t believe it and it was wrong!! Those are official business records that have been introduced in evidence. At one point right after she was told not to interrupt, she literally interrupted after the first word of the question. So if she’s irritable at being interrupted then the judge and Nelson have a right to be irritable at HER interruptions as well. And her opinions are not relevant and the defense has a right to object and the judge to sustain and cut her off. If she was indeed prepped properly, then it’s even more inexcusable IMO.
I personally didn't find her to be nervous at all.
As I've disclosed before I've been a juror several times myself, and the jury does watch, and listen closely to each witness including watching their body language, and how they answer all questions.
In the murder trials I've been on when a witness for either side came across as combative or even rude to either side or to the presiding judge it made the jury feel very uncomfortable to say the least.
There simply is no need to come across as snarky or argumentative no matter which side is doing the questioning.
The best witnesses are the ones who carefully listens to the questions asked first, and then calmly, and respectfully replies afterwards.
Like I said prior, I believe this witness, but felt very uncomfortable when she testified. She came across as if she felt she knew everything when she's really only been in this profession for two years.
I'm sure the DA has spoken with her since then like they usually do if they felt the witness didn't come across as well as expected.
It's not what she said in her testimony. Its how she said it especially to the defense attorney who was respectful to her when asking hus questions.
Being highly disrepectful to the judge is a big mo no. Jurors usually have a bond with the presiding judge, and seeing him disrespected doesn't go over well especially when there wasn't one reason to do so.
She forgets it seems this is his courtroom, and when he says something it must be respectfully listened , and adhered to immediately.
Jmhoo
