Zircon

Hi,
My final divorce hearing is tomm., with the DV extension order. My AH is fighting the extension. Needless to say, I'm very nervous about being on the witness stand.
My lawyer just texted me to say that my AH lawyer has agreed to make offers of truth arguments, instead of either one of us having to testify on the stand. My lawyer said he'll be telling my story. I don't know really what that means? Is that a good thing for my case. As nervous as I am, I'd be fine testifying. I just texted my lawyer and asked him if this is a good thing? And also how can his lawyer offer of truth arguments when my AH hasn't told the truth since the beginning. I haven't received a text back from my lawyer. Maybe, I'm worrying over nothing. I don't have any experiences in these matters. All I know, this is the first thing in over a year my AH lawyer has agreed upon.
Maybe it's my AH new girlfriend! Does this make things go quicker!!
I hope this is a good thing!!

Z

LexieCat

My guess is that his lawyer is suggesting this because he knows his client will make a terrible witness.

Whether it's a good idea for you, in this particular case, is a professional judgment call. Your lawyer knows your case much better than any of us do. I'd suggest taking his advice on this.

An "offer of truth" in this situation is, I think, what amounts to a stipulation. "IF so-and-so were to testify, this is what s/he would say." It means your lawyer won't be able to trip him up, but by the same token, his lawyer won't be able to trip YOU up--which can happen, even with the most truthful of witnesses.

Discuss it with your lawyer.

Zircon

Hi,
Lexie, thank you for answering. My lawyer wasn't texted me back yet. My friend who's driving me tomm., for support, thinks the only reason my AH lawyer agreed to this, is because my AH wouldn't be the best witness. But neither will I! LOL!!
At least it will all be behind me tomm. I'm sure I won't know the judges decision, but at least I'll be done preserating over all this!!
It's been a long hard road, one I hope never to be on again!!

Z

AnvilheadII

almost sounds like an Alford Plea - where one does not admit to guilt, but to the preponderance of evidence and the likely outcome of a trial.

but my google skills don't come up with anything re: offers of truth. now i'm curious........

flowerpower52

I think you will be ok! My thoughts are with you and generally lawyers know the best way to go!

LexieCat

Um, that's not exactly what an Alford Plea is, but that's OK. You're not sitting for a bar exam and nobody here is pleading to anything.

biminiblue

I wish you well tomorrow, Zircon. May it go in your favor on all points. You'll do great.

soberandhonest

I think that Lexie provided a good explanation for what this probably is. It's usually called an "offer of proof." I'm guessing that there was a miscommunication somewhere along the way and it was improperly identified as an offer of truth. In any event, Lexie's description is consistent with what I would expect.

LexieCat

Yeah, that's what I was thinking, too, except that she said he texted her, which seems to suggest the lawyer called it an "offer of truth"--and it doesn't quite fit with what an offer of proof is, which is usually offered for purposes of ruling on an objection.

Whatever. Her lawyer can explain it to her.

sauerkraut

I'll be thinking of you tomorrow, Zircon. My own hearing (opposing my STBXAH's request to discontinue sobriety monitoring) is next week, so I'm on pins and needles, too.
Remember to breathe.

Zircon

Hi,
My lawyer texted me back and said he should have said offer of proof argument. So is this a good thing to have happen??

Z

LexieCat

LOL, OK, now that we got the NAME of the thing right...

Well, what does your lawyer recommend? There are pros and cons to every strategy.

(Incidentally, I think I figured out what happened--your lawyer probably dictated the text. I do that if I'm driving. Siri--or whoever--heard "proof" as "truth.")

wanttobehealthy

My xAH LOVED the offers of proof approach-- his weasel, snake lawyer would tell crazy lies and present them as facts and my lawyer could never really, adequately poke holes in the lies he told like she could have if my x had testified. I finally said no more to offers of proof and I went with the testifying myself and having the chance to have my snake xAH directly questioned. Just before the first hearing that that was to be the approach, he fired his lawyer and suddenly was unwilling to show up at court. Thus I wound up getting a default judgement on a lot of issues.

So, I think offers of proof benefit the liar A in the situation. Just my two cents.

LexieCat

Good point, WTBH. But every case is different. A lot depends on the ability of the lawyer to conduct an effective cross, and also on the ability to present an effective case without live testimony.

Personally, I only like stipulations if there's nothing more I want to bring out than what the stipulation would get me.

Zircon

Hi,
Lexie, LOL, you're right he said he was texting in his car! Again, he said that's what he and my AH lawyer decided to do. Since, I really didn't understand the concept, and how my lawyer explained it was, I don't have to testify, and my lawyer will tell my story. I texted back to my lawyer, how would that help us, seems to me it will help my AH. And he hasn't told the truth since this whole process has started. So, will this potential hurt me? I really don't understand this curve ball being thrown at me!

Z

wanttobehealthy

Totally true-- the part about each case being different... I shouldn't have painted with such a broad brush. I think that my perspective came only after years of seeing one approach be manipulated by my sociopathic ex. I am sure that offers of proof work far better in 99% of cases than they did in mine

Hindsight being what it is, I would have avoided it, but with a more sane stb X spouse, I suspect it works much better!

wanttobehealthy

My two cents, from my own experience, is that when I had a gut level feeling about how something would go in court, especially when it was a last min curve ball (as this feels to you), I eventually learned to trust my own judgement.

While you may not be a lawyer, you DO know your soon to be X and I think that trusting your gut is valid.

You know yourself and you know him. If you feel that testifying yourself is your best bet, then stick with that.

I remember being in your shoes and I learned, after many times of NOT trusting my gut, that doing so, worked out a lot better for me in the long run.

Zircon

Hi,
I'm really getting nervous about this change. I truely don't understand it's purpose. Just because the 2 lawyers think it's good, doesn't mean it is! Also, why I just hearing about it now?? My AH is crazy and a liar. I wish I understood what was going to happen better so I could make a good decision. I have a hard time trusting anyone. I really haven't seen my lawyer argue anything so don't know if he's good because this is our first time in court. Just wondering, if I don't like what's happening, can I ask to testify?

Z

wanttobehealthy

Trust yourself. If you are confident in your ability to testify and feel this uncomfortable with the offer of proof approach, tell your lawyer that. You are paying the lawyer and they can offer their expert legal knowledge but you also get to have a say if you feel strongly enough about the situation.

It sounds like you're not at all comfortable with this new plan and I do not blame you since you can't be sure what your lawyer will say to testify on your behalf.

Trust yourself and go with your gut.

My two cents

LexieCat

Sure, you should be able to testify if you want to. Just think VERY carefully about whether there might be a downside for your side of the case. If you get very nervous, or you get angry with his lawyer (some like to goad you a bit to see if you'll lose it on the stand--yell at them, act hostile--which hurts your credibility) then it might be best this way. If you are POSITIVE you can control your emotions, let your LAWYER make any objections, and be very calm and remember everything you want to say, then go ahead and tell them you don't want to agree to that.

No matter how unfair or unreasonable-seeming the question, you are obligated to answer it truthfully, to the best of your ability, unless your lawyer objects and the judge sustains the objection. Them's the rules of the road. If you can stick to them, you should be fine.