Imagine your spouse engaged in a struggle, watching someone deliver a fatal blow. Soon the police are on the sidewalk. The officers want to know from you, as a witness, what happened. What a dilemma. Should you tell the truth? Should you make up a story? Can you retract a statement once made? In a panic, you tell the police everything that happened before your eyes, which lands your husband in jail for a long time.
By law, a witness cannot be compelled by the police to make a statement. In court, on the other hand, one must tell the truth. This means not only that a witness can be forced to testify, but also that he is punishable if, under oath, he lies.
However, the obligation to testify does not apply to everyone. For example, immediate family members of a defendant are not required to testify. The legislature, in some cases, places more value on preserving certain family relationships than on establishing the truth.
The right not to testify against a family member, for example, is called the "right of privilege" in the law. Thus, because of this right to privilege, a wife does not have to testify against her husband and a mother does not have to make a statement about one of her children.
But what can a person entitled to privilege do if he, or she, has made a statement to the police anyway? Often I hear clients say that they "then just retract the statement anyway." After all, they were not under oath. However, that is not possible!
A witness may make a new statement to the court, but this does not delete a previous statement. All statements made remain part of the record. And it is up to the judge to judge the reliability of all statements in that file.
Therefore, my advice is:
Be aware that you are not always required to testify. In the case of a suspected family member, you can invoke your right to privilege. If you do wish to testify, be aware that once you have made a statement, it cannot be retracted. Always consult your lawyer before making a statement. He can advise you about your rights and obligations.
Maastricht – Ruim twintig jaar verzamelde, maakte en verspreidde een 59-jarige man uit Maastricht volgens justitie op grote schaal kinderporno.
De Hoge Raad volgt E.E.W.J. Maessen in zijn cassatiemiddel dat klaagt over de bewezenverklaring van het tenlastegelegde medeplegen van witwassen.
De Hoge Raad volgt mr. E.E.W.J. Maessen in zijn cassatiemiddel dat klaagt dat het hof heeft bevolen dat de gestelde
De Hoge Raad heeft mr. E.E.W.J. Maessen gevolg in zijn cassatiemiddel dat klaagt over het oordeel van het hof dat
Maastricht – De politie heeft zondagavond een aanhouding verricht na een conflict aan de Banruwe, waarbij geschoten is met een
Twee Syriërs zijn op 26 mei in Eindhoven en Maassluis aangehouden. Ze worden verdacht van betrokkenheid bij de terroristische organisatie
Meers – Het omvangrijke drugsonderzoek naar Gino P. (45) uit Meers heeft ‘honderden onschuldige slachtoffers’ gemaakt. Dat stelt de hoofdverdachte,
De rechtbank heeft Heerlenaar Frans C. en Pascal T. uit Landgraaf veroordeeld tot celstraffen van acht jaar, en zes jaar
