Court Opinion

ID: 9564234
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 18:56:31.324646+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:18:18.195246
License: Public Domain

*477Littlejohn, Justice
(concurring) :
I concur in the opinion of Mr. Justice Lewis. At the same time, I have many misgivings as to the wisdom of continuing the rule that when .a party fails to produce the testimony of an available witness who is within some degree of control of the party, it may be inferred that the testimony of such witness, if presented, would be adverse to the party who failed to call the witness.
After almost 25 years on the trial and appellate bench, I have found that the rule is subject to much mischief and perhaps causes more problems than it helps to solve. Application of the rule suggests to a juror that he may speculate as to what an available, but non-testifying witness would say.
It would appear that failure of a witness, to testify is a matter which an attorney should argue to the jury.
The rule came into being through the common law. In my opinion, this Court should consider upon proper petition the advisability of eliminating it as a matter of common law.