Can one call an animal as a witness? -- ____________________________________________________________________ Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent. Ludwig Wittgenstein The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
On Tue, 3 Jul 2001, Jim Choate wrote:
Can one call an animal as a witness?
Bloodhounds were for a long time considered admissible in cases involving scent tracking, and may still be in some jurisdictions -- but I don't know whether they counted as "witnesses" or "evidence". Note that courtroom procedure calls for witnesses to be sworn in, and unless someone could convince a judge that the animal understood the concept of an oath and what was being sworn, that could probably be used to disqualify any animal "witness". Other than that though, the question is not interesting except in the case of language-using animals -- presently limited to apes and chimps trained to use sign language, and a few african Gray Parrots that seem to use speech in a symbolic rather than mimicking way. (Possibly also Dolphins and Orcas, but we're not sure yet and translation efforts have yielded limited results at best.) I've never heard of anyone attempting to call a language-using animal as a witness. When it happens, there will probably be a ruling. Bear
On a more or less off topic tangent, Do you think as far as the intelligence and competency of these language speaking and otherwise intelligent animals, If it was proven that they were equally or more so then ourself(the human race), could we admitt to that fact? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ray Dillinger" <bear@sonic.net> To: "Jim Choate" <ravage@einstein.ssz.com> Cc: <cypherpunks@einstein.ssz.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2001 1:18 AM Subject: CDR: Re: Calling witnesses
On Tue, 3 Jul 2001, Jim Choate wrote:
Can one call an animal as a witness?
Bloodhounds were for a long time considered admissible in cases involving scent tracking, and may still be in some jurisdictions -- but I don't know whether they counted as "witnesses" or "evidence".
Note that courtroom procedure calls for witnesses to be sworn in, and unless someone could convince a judge that the animal understood the concept of an oath and what was being sworn, that could probably be used to disqualify any animal "witness".
Other than that though, the question is not interesting except in the case of language-using animals -- presently limited to apes and chimps trained to use sign language, and a few african Gray Parrots that seem to use speech in a symbolic rather than mimicking way.
(Possibly also Dolphins and Orcas, but we're not sure yet and translation efforts have yielded limited results at best.)
I've never heard of anyone attempting to call a language-using animal as a witness. When it happens, there will probably be a ruling.
Bear
On a more or less off topic tangent, Do you think as far as the intelligence and competency of these language speaking and otherwise intelligent animals, If it was proven that they were equally or more so then ourself(the human race), could we admitt to that fact?
Only if they invented money and digital watches. -- -- http://www.apa.org/journals/psp/psp7761121.html It is one of the essential features of such incompetence that the person so afflicted is incapable of knowing that he is incompetent. To have such knowledge would already be to remedy a good portion of the offense.
participants (4)
-
David -
Jim Choate -
petro -
Ray Dillinger