My son is going thur a divorce--child custody battle and the deposition was going to last about 2 hours or so, in up lasting all day, my son said she lie around 15 -20 times but my son lawyer show her the evidence and made her to read it to the court reporter and she change her answer so what does that mean to her in front of a judge? {what I think the judge will not hear her} what do you think?

Was this a deposition (without a Judge) or a trial (with a Judge)?

It shows she lies - it doesn't mean that every word she says is a lie. It points out her character.

I was a shorthand reporter at one time, and deposition transcripts were used at trial when the person told a different story than what he/she said at deposition.

my son is going thur a divorce--child custody battle and the deposition was going to last about 2 hours or so, in up lasting all day, my son said she lie around 15 -20 times but my son lawyer show her the evidence and made her to read it to the court reporter and she change her answer so what does that mean to her in front of a judge? {what i think the judge will not hear her} what do you think? no court date as being set yet, the deposition was at my son lawyer office, no judge both lawyers and court reporter was there.

The transcript can and will be admitted to Court as proof that she lied during the deposition AND it will be used in Court if she tells different versions of the same event.

Sounds like your son's Attorney did a good job.

The transcript can and will be admitted to Court as proof that she lied during the deposition AND it will be used in Court if she tells different versions of the same event.

Sounds like your son's Attorney did a good job. thanks why do you think my son attorney show her the evidence and made her to read it to the court reporter and not on the stand? I know that his attorney know what she is doing I was just thinking why not on the stand in front of the judge?

And to be honest it will be like about 2/3 of the cases where the divorce is fought over. It is unusual for both sides not to lie in statements and in court.

Many times these hearings are done, the court will still push for the sides to reach agreements. And most will finally perhaps though mediation, reach a agreement

thanks why do you think my son attorney show her the evidence and made her to read it to the court reporter and not on the stand? i know that his attorney know what she is doing i was just thinking why not on the stand in front of the judge?

You aren't understanding me - this deposition can and will be admitted to Court. The Judge will read what she said. IF this goes to trial she will be asked many of the same questions and her answers at trial will be compared to her answers during the deposition.

Often both Attorneys now get an idea how their Attorneys will react on the stand and will decide whether to proceed or not.

For example, she said at deposition your son has blonde hair. She looked at a photo and changed her answer to brown hair. She will go to trial and be asked the same question. If she says "brown" your son's Attorney will bring the deposition to the attention of the Judge and tell the Judge that that is not what she said originally. If she says "blonde" the Attorney will tell the Judge that she said that at deposition and then corrected herself.

The deposition transcript WILL be admitted at time of trial.

Judykaytee thanks a lot my god bless you and your family people like you make people like me feel better sound like you know what you are talking about again thanks very much, you have a great day

thanks why do you think my son attorney show her the evidence and made her to read it to the court reporter and not on the stand?...

Because that's what the rules of evidence require her to do at trial. The idea is that she may have been "mistaken", so she is given an opportunity to hear her prior inconsistent statement, so as to give her an opportnity to "remember" the truth. I'm not sure that this was required at a deposition (as opposed to the trial), but the attorney may have been confused, or perhaps figured "better safe than sorry". A third explanation is that the attorney thought "If I show her the conflicting evidence now, at the deposition, the witness won't make the mistake of lying at trial."

I saw this frequently - I always thought it was a tool for one Attorney to prove to the other that his/her client was not necessarily truthful and full trial would not go well.

Many judges don't necessarily like divorce trials. There is too much he said/she said and lying. A lot of time is wasted in this.

His attorney may know the mood of the judge (or possible judge) who will be dealing with the case. So his idea may have been to deal with this in the deposition rather than waste the court's time.

In any case, the deposition transcript will show that she lied and only changed her story when confronted with proof of the lies