but for the sake of argument let's just say he (not known to her) banged every "eccie showcase" in Dallas prior to their marriage....
what arguments will her lawyer bring?
There's a general rule in court against the wholesale attack of your opponent's character or bringing up examples of prior bad acts when such evidence has no bearing on any disputed issue at trial.....I concur. Well said.
Of course, my opinion may be counterintuitive to those who watch TV lawyer shows, which to lawyers have as much basis in reality as "Avatar." Originally Posted by ShysterJon
yea but if she found out about all the providers and then wanted to divorce him she could just say he was being unfaithful. Then they can bring up all those past acts. Originally Posted by ZielThat's very unlikely, in my view. The original hypothetical assumes the husband was faithful; therefore, there can't be any credible evidence he was unfaithful. If the wife merely asserts her husband cheated, without explaining the basis of her belief, that would not been enough to get character or prior bad acts evidence admitted at trial.
been offered to inflame the passions of the jury against the husband. Of course, my opinion may be counterintuitive to those who watch TV lawyer shows, which to lawyers have as much basis in reality as "Avatar." Originally Posted by ShysterJon
That's very unlikely, in my view. The original hypothetical assumes the husband was faithful; therefore, there can't be any credible evidence he was unfaithful. If the wife merely asserts her husband cheated, without explaining the basis of her belief, that would not been enough to get character or prior bad acts evidence admitted at trial. Originally Posted by ShysterJonI think this is actually going to be a state-by-state issue. Some places - NY comes to mind - will probably allow it in if there were other circumstantial evidence to support it (e.g. - he stays in a lot of hotel rooms, unexplained cash expenditures, etc.). I agree that you've got a problem if the past behavior is all you have, but if there's something else to go with it I think you can argue for admission.