Oftentimes, people who don’t regularly work in the criminal justice system have a misunderstanding of the term “evidence.” This is likely due, in part, to all the CSI-type shows which have conditioned us to believe that fingerprints, DNA, or surveillance videos are going to be found that prove conclusively a certain person committed a crime. This is far from true in practice, however.
While the State must present proof beyond a reasonable doubt to convict someone of a crime, that proof does not have to overcome any possible doubt. Jurors are so instructed during the course of a trial. The question becomes, then, what type and how much evidence is needed before someone can be convicted?
The short answer is not a lot. It is not the quantity of evidence that matters, but the quality. Indiana law has long been clear that the uncorroborated testimony of a sole witness is sufficient evidence to convict. In other words, one person can come into court and testify that he or she saw you commit a particular crime, and if the finder of fact (jury or judge) believes that testimony beyond a reasonable doubt, you can be convicted. No additional evidence is necessary. The testimony of a sole witness is also sufficient for the Indiana Court of Appeals or Supreme Court to affirm a conviction on appeal.
While the rationale for this may be understandable, as there aren’t always other witnesses, video, or forensic evidence, its practical application can be problematic for presenting a defense. In sex offense cases, for example, oftentimes the alleged victim’s testimony is the only evidence presented in the prosecutor’s pursuit of a conviction. But that testimony is evidence as much as photographs, DNA results, and surveillance videos are. As a result, many people are convicted of these offenses because of nothing more than the accuser’s words. Ultimately it comes down to the credibility of the witness and the jury’s evaluation of the witness’s testimony.
People facing criminal charges often have trouble accepting that the law doesn’t require more. And given the number of exonerations we’ve seen over the years for people who were convicted but ultimately shown to have been innocent, perhaps the law should require more. But unless and until it does, people will continue to be charged and convicted of crimes based on the testimony of a single person.
Given that you can be convicted of a crime based on what just one person says, it is critical to retain an experienced attorney who can thoroughly investigate your case and gather evidence necessary for your defense. In cases where the evidence will be solely or mostly testimony, the witness’s credibility is of critical importance. It is therefore extremely valuable to have an experienced attorney, like the former prosecutors at Banks & Brower, on your side. Have you been charged with a crime or have criminal accusations being made against you? Give our office a call at 317-870-0019 and we will help you as much as possible. For every hour, there’s Banks & Brower!
Please read: Indiana Open Container Law
