Swearing on bible

[tinkerbell23]

Do you think its a bit outdated to swear on the bible in court now?

Seeing how there are lots of non believers!?

Xx

[FredPuli43]

A person of no religious belief, or whose religion does not provide for an oath, affirms.

The person swears by whatever binds his conscience but if his preferred means of doing so is impractical , he affirms. That stops the inconvenience if his oath would involve sacrificing a chicken!However, the major courts do try. There is one religion of the Chinese which involves breaking a plate or saucer,in taking an oath. The Old Bailey still keeps some breakable saucers for use in that event.

Jewish men are supposed to cover their head when taking the oath.Jewish judges, in particular, have been known to insist on this because intending Jewish perjurers have been known to avoid it, so their conscience is clear, though their evidence is lies. Strange thinking!

Can't say that swearing on the bible has any noticeable effect on the honesty of the witness though. It only serves to remind them of the seriousness of their evidence. A brief reminder of the law of perjury would do as well or as badly for most.

[HowardKennitby]

^

I agree with Fred.
Witnesses in court can be divided into 2 types; those that intend to tell the truth as best they can and those that intend to lie as best they can. Swearing oaths or any other ceremony will not change that.

[HowardKennitby]

I meant to add that I am also unaware of the purpose of witnesses standing to give evidence. I have never found myself to be more truthful or my recall to be better when standing up as opposed to seated.

[pdust]

I've given evidence in court and refused to swear on the bible... i just swore to tell the truth blahblahblah.... if i had been made to swear on the bible and i was inclined to lie it wouldnt have stopped me..... i think when i took my divorce papers to court to get my decree nisi i also was asked to swear.... they had a little booklet with lots of different religions in it and just flicked to the non religious one for me.....

[missprim]

Mickrog that Dave Allen clip's a classic, so funny and very apt to Tinkerbell's question. Going off to YouTube to see some more.

[FredPuli43]

Three reasons for witnesses standing: they are easier to hear, for people find it easier to speak more loudly when standing; the witnesses' 'body language' and demeanour is read more easily and more fully; the witness box has a ruddy great high front to it and short witnesses would disappear sitting down!

But some judges still get quite carried away by genteel etiquette to women. They sometimes almost rush out to offer the poor, weak, fainting things a chair! "Do sit down, if you feel more comfortable, madam' they purr, at the very least.

Americans manage with an open-fronted stand, but we prefer to hide the legs of our witnesses. They don't have a dock, either. Look, it's bad enough having the lay client passing occasional notes, usually both irrelevant and distracting, from the back via the solicitor's clerk. Having the client sitting right next to you and talking would be hell! It would only encourage them