Swearing in court allowed?

[bitchstewie]

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/may/13/ben...

Ignoring the horrific nature of the case I didn't think such language was allowed in general testimony?

I get that it may have to be used in the context of e.g. a Police Officer saying "Then the accused told me to "fk off"" but a bit surprised to read the casual nature of the testimony.

Is this normal or is it a case of needs must when dealing with people who seem to have "issues"?

[Zod]

There is a certain type of person that finds it hard to express himself/herself without swearing. Judges have to deal with them in court.

[98elise]

Zod said:

There is a certain type of person that finds it hard to express himself/herself without swearing. Judges have to deal with them in court.

I have a relative like that. Every other sentence has the word "fking" in it like its an required adjective to everything.

[4x4Tyke]

Yes, many years ago I was a witness in the magistrates court and was told to use the exact language used by the defendant including profanity.

[Jasandjules]

What do you mean?

If someone was threatened and said "I'll kick your f***ng head in". Then that is what is written in the statement and that is what will be spoken in court.

[paintman]

Zod said:

There is a certain type of person that finds it hard to express himself/herself without swearing. Judges have to deal with them in court.

Normal speech for some. Won't necessarily do themselves any favours with a jury & may be easily wound up by the prosecution solicitor/barrister which will only make matters worse for them.

[98elise]

Jasandjules said:

What do you mean?

If someone was threatened and said "I'll kick your f***ng head in". Then that is what is written in the statement and that is what will be spoken in court.

I might be missing something but if quoting what was said then its fine, but if you are just trying to express yourself and it includes swearing then its not the same thing.

[Baryonyx]

4x4Tyke said:

Yes, many years ago I was a witness in the magistrates court and was told to use the exact language used by the defendant including profanity.

There is repeating a swear word for evidential purposes as a true record of what was said, and then there is the testimony in this case which is peppered with casual swearing that isn't always recollecting a specific phrase uttered previously. I suspect in this case, the witness is not told to mind his tongue simply so he can speak freely and have as good a chance as possible of acquitting himself well.

For a professional witness in the box though, swearing casually is a big 'no' and every phrase is uttered with deference.

[TooMany2cvs]

Baryonyx said:

I suspect in this case, the witness is not told to mind his tongue simply so he can speak freely and have as good a chance as possible of acquitting himself well.

Indeed. Looking at the article, the defendant was accusing the judicial system of not allowing him a fair trial. Clearly, tempers and emotions were running high. Would telling him to mind his language or face a contempt charge have helped anything at all?

[bitchstewie]

98elise said:

I might be missing something but if quoting what was said then its fine, but if you are just trying to express yourself and it includes swearing then its not the same thing.

^^

Exactly that.

Being asked "So where were you on the night of the crime?" and answering "In the fking kitchen doing the fking dishes" isn't something I thought was allowed.

[davemac250]

Many years ago I was at Middlesex Crown Court with an armed robbery job.

I'd given my evidence and was sat at the back watching the DS give his bit and was then off for a pint with the team.

The DS was asked 'Officer, is it right that you called my client a when you arrested him?'

His reply was.

'Yes your worship, I did call him a '

''Do you not think that unprofessional?'

'Your worship, anyone who breaks into a house, steals a pair of matched shotguns worth twenty thousand, saws the ends off and goes out and robs a petrol station for £1500 is a in my book'.

Deadpan.

He didn't even twitch.

[PV7998]

A court story I was told many years ago.......probably not true but funny anyway:

A Met Traffic Division officer is on duty and driving back to the garage one night when he comes across a disturbance in the street. In amongst this disturbance is a man running around shouting "fk this" and "fk that" all over the place.

The Traffic Division officer arrests him for the (old) offence of Threatening Behaviour.

At the magistrates Court, the man pleads not guilty and in his defence says that as he is a builder/scaffolder/young bloke or whatever the word "fk" is just a normal part of his everyday language.

The Magistrates accept this and find him Not Guilty.

Fast forward to the afternoon session at Court, and the same Traffic Officer appears before the same Magistrates for a completely separate case of someone driving with a defective exhaust.

The traffic officer is asked to give evidence, and after the usual introductions he says to the Magistrates "I stopped the car, and upon examination I found that it had a fking great big hole in the silencer box".....................