Your praise made me a have a critical look at his conduct and he is failing big time in the courtroom decorum. His activism background is his big limitationYou show you have a personal grudge against Kibatala, possibly because he is smarter than you are. You're not the final authority in judging his capabilities. Let people assess his capabilities as they see the way he handles this case.
I have no particular knowledge of him, but seeing what he is presenting in court, I am impressed by what he is doing. Whether he is smart or not, I'll make my own observations based on his performance in this court, notwithstanding the final outcome of the case.
You know nothing about cross-examination. Your copy and paste post reveals greatly you hatred to Kibatala! Pyuuuuuu!
In responding to you i am placing before you what the legal experts say:-You know nothing about cross-examination. Your copy and paste post reveals greatly you hatred to Kibatala! Pyuuuuuu!
Bush lawyer unaleta ujinga wako kwenye mitandao badala ya kumface na kumuelimisha Wakili mwenzako inaonekana wewe ni Wakili wa serikali bwege wewe na bado atakunyoosha sana tu. Jinga kabisaAccusing a witness of “lying.”
The older lawyers also taught me that I must never directly accuse a witness or a party of “lying” while I was questioning them. Yet every week I hear lawyers doing this. This is usually done by the lawyer asking the accusative rhetorical question:
“Sir, you do know that you are under oath now, don’t you?” Or: “Is that your signature on that financial affidavit?” A rhetorical question is one to which no answer is needed or expected, one that is its own answer. Rhetorical questions are, by definition, argumentative questions and argumentative questions are improper, objectionable questions
A lawyer can argue to the court at the conclusion of the evidence, but a lawyer cannot argue with a witness.
So, this question is improper because it is an argumentative question. It is also unethical to directly accuse a witness of lying because it injects the lawyer’s personal opinion into the questioning. It is also out of order because it presents argument on the credibility of a witness during presentation of evidence and not during final argument.
It is also very ineffective lawyering. It makes me think the lawyer resorting to such improper behavior has no merit to his case because he is obscuring the issues by making unethical accusations directly to a witness instead of admitting evidence that supports his case. It also makes the witness so defensive that nothing probative will be obtained from that witness.
Effective questioning is subtle and appears to be misdirected so that the witness does not realize he is giving information helpful to the questioner. Basketball players who cannot feint will have their passes intercepted, and lawyers who are obvious in the line of their questioning will have the witness anticipating the next the question.
Accusative, hostile, blundering questioning puts the witness on guard and clues him to the path the lawyer is taking. It also proves nothing, except that the lawyer is very ineffective.
You purpot to know his "activism background", whatever that means; I don't.Your praise made me a have a critical look at his conduct and he is failing big time in the courtroom decorum. His activism background is his big limitation
Many people think Kibatala is a good lawyer. It is their opinion which they are entitled to have. However, they are not entitled to the fact. I have posted this article after doing a fact check on his courtroom decorum by subjecting him to expertise marking scheme. What i have found is that he is scoring low marks. What do you think- I do not careYou purpot to know his "activism background", whatever that means; I don't.
What? My "praise of him"? What praise are you writing about?
Then you appear to be 'unreal'. My praise of him "made you have a critical look at his conduct"? What the heck are you saying? You mean when you decided to put forth the thread under discussion you had no knowledge of him?
Yuko sawa, soma vizuri hiyo sentence ya ..... all the lawyer... alternatively angeweza kutumia what badala ya all.Ki English chako hakiko sawa pia. All the Lawyer.... What matter....
So, if you agree they are entitled to "their opinion", where is the problem?Many people think Kibatala is a good lawyer. It is their opinion which they are entitled to have. However, they are not entitled to the fact. I have posted this article after doing a fact check on his courtroom decorum by subjecting him to expertise marking scheme. What i have found is that he is scoring low marks. What do you think- I do not care
Wanasema call a spade a spade and not a big spoon.Ndiyo hivyo tena top to bottom waongo pamoja na wewe. Ni sawa kabisa kuambiwa waongo kwa lugha yoyote na kwa namna yoyote.
Mbona mnateseka? mnampenda sana Mbowe? simtulie?SIYO SAWA kwa wakili kumuuita shahidi MUUNGO au kutumia maneno ya kumdharirisha shahidi.
Pia wakili hapaswi kutoa maoni yake juu ya jambo lolote
pia ni makosa kwa wakili kuitisha mkutano wa vyombo vya habari na kueleza kuwa mteja wake hana hatia wakati kesi inaendelea. Tazama
Gentile v. State Bar, 501 U.S. 1030 (1991) had a strong impact on the way the legal profession can enforce publicity regulation. In "Gentile", a lawyer was subjected to discipline for setting up a press conference and declaring his client’s innocence. The lawyer’s goal was to use the conference as a means to fend off adverse publicity. The United States Supreme Court held that while the lawyer should not have been disciplined, states may impose reasonable restrictions on the conduct of lawyers so as to prevent extrajudicial statements from prejudicing the outcome of a case.
Kamtukana nani?Lissu hataki hata kuisikia hiyo kesi, akiulizwa huenda akasema Mbowe aondoe kabisa mawakili mahakama iamue itakavyoamua.
Fatma Karume alinyang'anywa leseni yake ya uwakili na kina Feleshi enzi za jiwe kwa sababu za "kutukana"
Mkono yuko wapi? Bado ni mgonjwa ?Bado ni mbunge kupitia CCM?
Huyo El- Maamry ndio nani?
Wewe unatoa povu humu na jina bandia unakuja kumkosoa Kibatala jinga kabisaAfanye anachotakiwa kufanya bila kuvunja taaratibu na miiko yake ya kazi yake
Wewe umeshinda kesi ngapi tuanzie hapa kwanzaKibatala anatakiwa akafanye kazi nje kama south africa walau miaka miwili aone jinsi mawakili wa utetezi wanavyoweza kupangua kesi
Kesi ya mteja wa kibatala inayoweza kuchukua miezi mitatu kuisha,kwa kibatala inaweza kuchukua hata miaka miwili na bado akashindwa
Mara atakata rufaa mahakama kuu kuwa mteja alisachiwa usiku wa manane,mara atafungua kesi ndani ya kesi kumpinga tu shahidi,matokeo concentration kwa kesi ya msingi inapungua na jamhuri inazidi kujipanga
Kesi ya sugu ilikua hivyo hivyo mwisho akajitoa na kwa mdude hivyo hivyo
Mpaka wanakuja wa mabook jinga sanaSasa hivi mmekosa chakusema kuhusu kesi mmekimbilia kumkosoa Kibatala. Hivi hamuoni makosa wafanyayo mawakili wa serikali kupitia mashahidi wao?
KilangiKamtukana nani?
Mjinga tu uwakili autoe wapi ....Bush lawyer unaleta ujinga wako kwenye mitandao badala ya kumface na kumuelimisha Wakili mwenzako inaonekana wewe ni Wakili wa serikali bwege wewe na bado atakunyoosha sana tu. Jinga kabisa
AlimwambiajeKilangi
Fatma Karume akwaa kizingiti kingine, Jamhuri yakata rufaa kupinga uamuzi wa Mahakama Kuu
PICHA: Fatma Karume Jamhuri imewasilisha nia ya kukata rufani kupinga uamuzi wa Mahakama Kuu uliotengua uamuzi wa kumfuta katika orodha ya mawakili, Fatma Karume. Nia hiyo ya kukata rufani imekwamisha maombi ya Fatma kupitia Wakili wake, Peter Kibatala, ya kutaka Msajili wa Mahakama Kuu atoe...www.jamiiforums.com
see for your self the proof of the novice and unethical of KibatalaSo, if you agree they are entitled to "their opinion", where is the problem?
That "court room decorum" is irrelevant. There is a judge presiding in the courroomt. Let him take care of that. You're not even talking about the substance of the law here!
Then you ask "what do I think", about what? Your "subjecting him to expertise marking scheme"? How can I have an opinion on something (marking scheme) that I am not privy to?
Kama imeloa Tia mateYou need to divulge your identity to be able to question the credentials of the learned counsel otherwise hiding behind pseudonym shows that you're not sincere in your challenge and that your endeavouring to tarnish the good image of the learned counsel just to justify the stipends you're getting from your paymasters.
It seems the learned counsel's defensive approach to this trumped up litigation is a cause for concern to his client's persecutors like you in particular and your paymasters in general, hence your baseless challenge.
Afadhali kuwa mjinga kuliko kuwa wakili asiye na maadili kama KibatalaMjinga tu uwakili autoe wapi ....