You are a lawyer for the defense in a case where you are defending your client against a robbery conviction. The main evidence the prosecutor presents is the convenience clerk’s eyewitness testimony. What would you tell the jury about the validity of and problems with eyewitness testimony? Your response should be ½ to 1 page in length

The correct answer is that eyewitness can be very flaky and untrustworthy.

Explanation:

To the jury, yes their is a eyewitness of this allegedly robbery that my client is being accused of, however how can we be certain that what he says is true. I agree their is nothing that can tell us this person is lying but also there is nothing that is telling they are telling the truth. People sometimes think they saw something when that thing did not occured, it may not be their intentions but the consequences that my client could suffer if you belive in whatever the eyewitness says can be very detremental. As well, for all we know this eyewitness could be the thief and they are saying they saw someone else do it to take the fault out of their way.

So please jury, dont think just because someone says they think they saw somethin that saw the right thing and that they are not lying.

the historians cited in the article all agree with one another about the cause of the civil war. despite coming from different backgrounds and cultures, the historians agree that slavery was the root cause of the civil war. the fact that all these historiansgenerally agree with one another makes their shared viewpoints more reliable and valid, especially because the historians have different backgrounds and all work for the well-respected institutions of howard university, clemson university, and the university of colorado.

answer; if congress didn't act on certain requests;