Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

oath against an oath

Read a random definition: articles of the eyre

A quick definition of oath against an oath:

Term: Oath Against an Oath

Definition: When two people have different stories about something important, and there is no other evidence to help decide who is telling the truth, it becomes a swearing match. This means that the person who is believed is usually the one who is more trustworthy, like a police officer instead of a criminal. This is also called a swearing contest or oath against an oath.

A more thorough explanation:

Definition: An oath against an oath is a situation where determining a crucial fact involves choosing between the credibility of two witnesses who have irreconcilable differences in their statements, and there is no other evidence to rely on. This is also known as a swearing match or a swearing contest.

Example: In a court case, two witnesses give conflicting statements about what they saw at the scene of a crime. One witness is a police officer, and the other is a convicted drug dealer. The fact-finder, such as a judge or jury, must decide which witness to believe based on their credibility. In this case, the police officer may be considered more reputable and trustworthy than the drug dealer, and their testimony may be given more weight.

Explanation: The example illustrates how an oath against an oath can occur in a legal setting, where the credibility of witnesses is crucial in determining the outcome of a case. The fact-finder must weigh the credibility of each witness and decide which testimony to believe, as there is no other evidence to rely on. This highlights the importance of credibility and honesty in giving testimony and taking oaths.

OASI | oath-helper

Warning

Info

General

General chat about the legal profession.
main_chatroom
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
17:34
@LawIsForPeasants: I just want you to know that: you matter, you are important, and finally, I am proud of you. :D
That is so fucking cringe and leave me alone
llama i appreciate you
17:35
@LawIsForPeasants: while charlie kirk's facts do not care about your feelings, just know that I do!
texaslawhopefully
17:36
@Dkk: Fair enough, but if you're using political philosophy to defend Trump, it's hard to reconcile him as a candidate with very relevant classic political theory, like Locke's individual rights and limited government as illustrated in the 2nd treatise, or the constitutional framework limiting executive power (e.g., Federalist 51). Trump's disregard for constitutional checks and populist rhetoric directly is in tension with our very foundational principles.
Dkk
17:36
@SplitterusClitterus: sounds good. Trying to paint a wine glass rn anyway after I just woke up.
Dkk
17:37
@texaslawhopefully: Psssh I would not use gender relations as a way to defend Trump. He does not go that route and I think literally him and everyone in their cabinet has no idea what those are. I mean, just look at how many divorces Elon and Trump have had.
texaslawhopefully
17:38
Was that not why you said you voted for him?
17:38
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: can I ask what “2 years retroactive withdrawals” means
17:39
elon and trump realize there are many fish in the sea, and sometimes u can't just 'make it work'
@sadpadresfan: grades changed to W for two consecutive years of classes
Dkk
17:39
Nah, I did not vote. I have never voted in my life because I have a lot of issues with it. 4 years ago my mom filled out my ballot for me because she wanted to but I do not vote.
17:40
based fellow non voter
@llama i do not need or desire external validation.
17:40
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: ah I see
17:41
@LawIsForPeasants: ok, sorry, I will not bother u while u 'self validate yourself in the corner' my bad.
@llama: im self validating so hard rn
17:42
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: thats very ithica of you, wasp.
texaslawhopefully
17:44
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: Out of curiosity, since you're in law school and prolly know fedsoc people, how conservative do you think you have to be to be in fedsoc? Like is a david french sort of conservative fairly common in it, or is it the maga type people mainly
i dont interact with any fedsoc people, but i dont know any maga people at cornell. but the student body overwhelmingly leans left, so i think they might not be comfortable showing that theyre conservative if that makes sense?
one time a guy kind of crashed out about masks in conlaw
but that's the most ive seen
texaslawhopefully
17:47
Yeah, that does make sense. I would like to join fedsoc, but I'm also, clearly, very opposed to Trump and where the GOP has gone.
if you join fedsoc and go for clerking and eventually become a judge. you will be pinholed into maga politics as long as maga is the predominant conservative stance
Idk if @irishdinosaur is online but congrats on UCLA!!
next you will say you want to be the first black kkk grand wizard
@SaddestPortlander: tysm!!!!
texaslawhopefully
18:00
yes congrats irishdinosaur! that's incredible
18:03
@IrishDinosaur: you inspire me and my completely misguided cope that I might ever get into UCLA
Super big congrats irish!!!
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.