<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Witness statement: include everything</title>
	<atom:link href="http://etclaims.co.uk/2008/12/witness-statement-include-everything/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://etclaims.co.uk/2008/12/witness-statement-include-everything/</link>
	<description>tactics &#38; precedents</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 04 Dec 2011 17:45:55 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adrian Melia</title>
		<link>http://etclaims.co.uk/2008/12/witness-statement-include-everything/comment-page-1/#comment-2410</link>
		<dc:creator>Adrian Melia</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jul 2010 22:18:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://etclaims.co.uk/?p=739#comment-2410</guid>
		<description>I am tempted to just write &quot;except in Scotland&quot;. 

I am running my first case under Scottish jurisdiction and was surprised to discover just how different the rules are on witnesses. There are no witness statements prepared in advance, and witnesses are not allowed into the hearing until they have given their evidence. This system is good in the sense that it inhibits witnesses from adapting their stories to meet what has been said by others. It is a pain for advocates (especially those weened on the English way) because it requires much more thinking on one&#039;s feet than is necessary when you know precisely what someone is going to say in advance.

Perhaps a section on the peculiarities of the Scottish system would be a helpful addition to your wonderful book.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am tempted to just write &#8220;except in Scotland&#8221;. </p>
<p>I am running my first case under Scottish jurisdiction and was surprised to discover just how different the rules are on witnesses. There are no witness statements prepared in advance, and witnesses are not allowed into the hearing until they have given their evidence. This system is good in the sense that it inhibits witnesses from adapting their stories to meet what has been said by others. It is a pain for advocates (especially those weened on the English way) because it requires much more thinking on one&#8217;s feet than is necessary when you know precisely what someone is going to say in advance.</p>
<p>Perhaps a section on the peculiarities of the Scottish system would be a helpful addition to your wonderful book.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

