Post by
ByeByeLes on Apr 12, 2007 1:21am
CREDIBILITY
from https://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/sc/00/03/s00-0304.htm
[14] I will observe here, that on numerous occasions the evidence in this case was found to be most unsatisfactory. On others it was simply not credible. I did not find Mr. Kjosness to be a good historian. Additionally, he was giving evidence of events which occurred some three and one half years earlier, and mainly from memory. It seemed to me that much of his evidence was reconstructed; what perhaps he has now convinced himself was said and done, but not what was actually said and done. It was often internally inconsistent, and contradicted other evidence which I accepted. Moreover, his evidence with regard to the primary issues, the oral agreements he says that Mr. Campbell made prior to, and during the Contract, was highly improbable, that is to say, was entirely inconsistent with the preponderance of probabilities which the surrounding facts and circumstances give rise to.
-------------------------------------------------------
One should recognize his own limitations.