Why is it that on my pre-lim hearing copies it does not state that the police officer did swear to tell the truth under oath?

Asked almost 2 years ago - Bakersfield, CA

On both my lawyer and my copies of my pre-lim hearing. When the police officer went up to the stand, the judge asked him to swear to tell the truth and nothing but the truth-now i was present, so i know for a fact he did say, "i do". Now in these copies it does not state that! Why? Doesn't that make this whole report "false" in a way? He did lie under oath in my pre-lim hearing and therefore it proves it on this paper work! So, how is it that this specific line that is truly important in any case is missing? It honestly just finishes the judge statement asking if he swears to tell the truth, then the very next line it states, "You may be seated". Now, the ladies that type are professionals, they know not to make mistakes, and definitely would not leave that part out. So why is it missing?

Attorney answers (2)

  1. Malosack Berjis

    Contributor Level 20


    Lawyer agrees

    Answered . Under the circumstances, as you have briefly described them, I could see how you would have these questions. However, have you asked your lawyer to address them for you? I ask this because he/she is in the best position to discuss such an issue with you, given that he/she is more familiar with your case than any attorney on this website, and he/she was at the preliminary hearing.

    This attorney is licensed to practice law in the State of California. The laws of your jurisdiction may differ... more
  2. James S. Lawrence

    Contributor Level 15


    Lawyer agrees

    Answered . The truth or falsity of what the officer stated is not changed by whether the officer did or did not swear that the testimony would be true. It is fairly common for court reporters to make errors and not completely get down on paper everything said in court. The routine existence of mistakes is not changed by an opinion that the court reporters "know" not to make mistakes. Mistakes happen even when not intended, such as in a recent transcript of mine where I said the word "doctor" in the question, but the reporter put it down as "document." In another transcript I said "concrete blocks and metal pipes" but the reporter put it down as "concrete blocks, metal blocks." There is no reason to believe that the errors were intentional.

    At trial, you might ask the officer/witness if he did swear to tell the truth at the prelim, and if he says he did, hand him an extra copy of the transcript and ask him to point out where in the transcript he did that. Possibly, when he is unable to do that, that could affect the jury's view of his credibility, but it is not clear it would have that effect.

    Contact me at 248-399-6930 for a free consultation. You and I do not have an attorney-client relationship formed... more

Related Topics

Constitutional law

Constitutional law focuses on examining and interpreting the US Constitution, and seeing how the rights it grants relate to various laws and court decisions.

Privacy law

Privacy law is typically associated with an individual's right to privacy and control over his or her likeness, but may also deal with corporate matters.

Can't find what you're looking for? Ask a Lawyer

Get free answers from experienced attorneys.


Ask now

30,169 answers this week

3,404 attorneys answering

Ask a Lawyer

Get answers from top-rated lawyers.

  • It's FREE
  • It's easy
  • It's anonymous

30,169 answers this week

3,404 attorneys answering