Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

strongly corroborated

Read a random definition: Cairns's Act

A quick definition of strongly corroborated:

Strongly corroborated: When someone says something in court, it's important to have evidence that supports what they're saying. If the evidence is strong and clear, it can help convince the judge and jury that what the person is saying is true. This is called "strongly corroborated" testimony.

A more thorough explanation:

Term: STRONGLY CORROBORATED
Definition: When testimony is strongly corroborated, it means that it is supported by independent facts and circumstances that are powerful, satisfactory, and clear to the court and jury.
Examples: A witness testifies that they saw a suspect at the scene of a crime. This testimony is strongly corroborated if there is also video footage of the suspect at the scene, DNA evidence linking the suspect to the crime, and other witnesses who saw the suspect at the same time and place. Another example could be a victim's testimony about being assaulted, which is strongly corroborated if there are medical records showing injuries consistent with the assault, eyewitnesses who saw the victim shortly after the assault, and security footage showing the suspect in the area at the time of the assault.
Explanation: When testimony is strongly corroborated, it means that there is a lot of evidence supporting it. This evidence comes from different sources and is powerful enough to convince a court and jury that the testimony is true. In the examples given, the testimony is supported by other evidence such as video footage, DNA evidence, medical records, eyewitnesses, and security footage. This makes the testimony more believable and helps to prove the case.

strong-arm clause | strong mark

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
Dont agree dkk but out of messages so this is a talk for another day
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
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.