07-09-2015, 07:08 PM
This is the correct ruling under the law. You can't force someone to have an attorney represent him, and if the children are going to testify in court they must be cross-examined.
However if this guy really did it I predict that he is making a BIG mistake. I have had to cross-examine children as young as 7 in child rape cases. It is the hardest thing for a lawyer to do. You have to discredit their testimony without attacking them in any way. And if these children really are traumatized by him asking them questions it will just make him look worse in front of the jury. I don't see any way possible this works out in his favor.
**NOTE** It does seem that under their state law if a psychologist testified that the children would be traumatized the judge may have decided differently.
However if this guy really did it I predict that he is making a BIG mistake. I have had to cross-examine children as young as 7 in child rape cases. It is the hardest thing for a lawyer to do. You have to discredit their testimony without attacking them in any way. And if these children really are traumatized by him asking them questions it will just make him look worse in front of the jury. I don't see any way possible this works out in his favor.
**NOTE** It does seem that under their state law if a psychologist testified that the children would be traumatized the judge may have decided differently.
