In-Person Hearings Make All the Difference

Some things are ingrained in our culture. When I was a kid, we never asked women their age or men how much they made. These cultural restrictions on behavior presumably were designed to protect people and their interests.

Although in today’s modern age these cultural affectations regarding men and women may be outdated, the right to confrontation guaranteed by the United States and Georgia Constitutions is thankfully very much up-to-date, current, alive, and well. This right guarantees that everyone who is charged with a crime has the right to cross-examine the witnesses the government calls to testify against them.

What’s so great about this right? It allows whoever is listening to the testimony—a judge or a jury—to carefully observe the answers the person gives to questions. Are they telling the truth or lying? Are they biased? Do they actually know, personally, about what happened, or did they hear about it from someone else? How do they react to difficult questions about what they know or believe?

We assess whether the person is telling the truth or lying and the motivations that drive how they respond to questions based on what they say as much as how they say it. As clear as video may be, it can never substitute for actually being in the same room with the person to observe these things. Everyone who has lived through COVID has seen the limitations of video.

For this reason, when liberty is at stake, only an in-person hearing will generally do. Of course, there are, at times, exceptions that warrant a video hearing. But, when the stakes are high, it is best to be in-person.

**This blog post is informational only. It does not constitute legal advice, and it does not create an attorney-client relationship. As with all legal matters, you should consult with an attorney for advice on your particular case.