If you were factually innocent would you testify?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

5 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	Yes
	3 (60%)
	No
	2 (40%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[Decoy of Fenris]

1. Nope: Testifying gives a chance for you to slip up, to create doubt.

If I knew I was factually and completely innocent, I'd also know that the facts would speak for themselves. I would refrain from testifying if at all possible, because I might crack under a dedicated cross examination.

[yardwork]

7. What would happen if you cracked if you were innocent?

If I were innocent I would want to explain my side of the story. I wouldn't have to worry about cracking if I was already telling the truth.

[Avalux]

9. "Slipping up" only happens when a person lies.

If truthful, the story won't change even if told a thousand times, no matter what tricks cross examination uses.

[geek tragedy]

2. Same calculus as if I were guilty--would it help my chances? nt

[Lurks Often]

3. It would really depend on how well my attorney and I thought the case was going,

but yes I can see not testifying if the negatives out weigh the positives

[rollin74]

4. not if I felt that the prosecution had failed to prove their case

beyond a reasonable doubt

[Lex]

5. Of course. nt

[yardwork]

6. Yes, especially if I had already been interviewed

by Sean Hannity and provided a taped reenactment of the incident.

[Nevernose]

8. I was sued for wrongful death

I went to the depositions, I testified on my own behalf at the trial. My story never changed, not one tiny iota. I told my story dozens of times, to police, lawyers, family members, friends, and a jury, and my testimony remained consistent the entire time.

I won.

I felt terrible and expressed remorse, but never guilt, because I did absolutely nothing wrong.

[galileoreloaded]

10. perception becomes reality. never give up that ground. nt