This would make the third adjournment of this case always due to the illness of some defense witness.

Now, granted that this witness is ill, the defense still has 11 important witnesses able to testify while the plaintiff has but one.

We call Dr. Matthew Swain to the stand, as a witness for the defense.

After all the witnesses for the prosecution had been heard, the defence began to present its case.

Twenty four defence witnesses have thus far testified.

During the course of 34 trial days, 19 prosecution witnesses and 33 defence witnesses testified.

From that point, 23 defence witnesses testified over 34 trial days.

Since the defence has called but one witness, the prisoner, it has the right to be heard last.

In the Military I case, with four accused, over 50 defence witnesses have testified.

It oversaw the movement of 185 prosecution witnesses and 115 defence witnesses from 21 countries.

Whether they testified for the prosecution or for the defence during the trials at Arusha, all received the same treatment.

The cooperation of the Rwandan State also facilitated the travel to Arusha of the prosecution and defence witnesses living in Rwanda.

The defense has proved... that Mrs. Cameron is a woman of high repute, and innumerable witnesses have testified... that she was an affectionate and indulgent mother to the children.

Proceedings in the main trial were also fundamentally flawed, with the court summarily rejecting 30 defence witnesses, also a violation of the European Convention.

Objection. Counsel has no right to question the integrity of the witness.

The Prosecution closed its case in September 2004 after having called eighty two witnesses, and the Defence case started in April 2005.

I've never known an instance where the defense called the prosecuting attorney as a witness.

In two of those trials, which involve 10 accused, the defence is presenting its evidence.

18. The defence called its first witness on 17 November 1997.

The burden of proof lay with the prosecution, and it was not for the defendants to prove their innocence.

I protest against being prevented from introducing evidence... that I consider vital to the defense.

The defence will complete its evidence in early 2006.

It is submitted that the lack of preparation of the defence led to a failure to properly cross examine the prosecution witnesses, to lack of communication between the authors and their lawyers and to the lack of attendance of witnesses for the defence.

He is entitled not only to cross examine the prosecution witnesses but may also introduce evidence in defence on behalf of the accused.

According to the newspapers his own defence lawyer will ask for him to be committed to a psychiatric hospital, as psychiatric experts have recommended.

Have you come to testify for the prosecution or the defense?

I object to counsel badgering the witness over this relatively minor point.

I ask that the case for the defence be reopened. And that a witness be recalled.

Nearly three months of the seven month trial were devoted to the presentation of evidence by the defence, including video depositions taken by the defence in Cuba.

The prosecutors were allowed to put questions to the prosecution experts, but the defence was not allowed to question the defence experts, who were merely permitted to confirm their reports.

He paid a doctor to certify him as unfit.

Here, too, the defence has nearly completed the presentation of its evidence.

The argument by Mr. Choi and his defence counsel that he had had no part in the plot could not be sustained.

Well, Your Honor, the defense wishes to place Dr. Keller on the stand so that he can explain to the gentlemen of the jury the exact meaning of The Theory of Evolution.

1.8 To establish a prima facie case against the accused person to warrant the Trial Judge to call on him for his defence, the Prosecution has to call afresh all relevant witnesses to give oral testimony or, where agreed to by Defence Counsel, the submission of the written depositions of all or any of such witnesses, all of whom the Defence Counsel will be entitled to cross examine.

2.3 The pathologist testified that the injuries of which the deceased died could have been inflicted with the weapon that had been described by the eyewitnesses.

1.13 At the close of the defence both the Prosecution and the Defence are entitled to put forward submissions on both the law and the sufficiency of the evidence, either in support of the Prosecution apos s or the Defence apos s case, as the case may be, adduced during the trial.

The witness arrived after the defence had completed its case but before the judge had started his summing up.

I promise not to get sick. I wouldn't want to embarrass you.

Moreover, the principle of adversarial proceedings was allegedly not observed at the trial before the State Security Court Thus, the defence was unable to challenge the evidence presented by the prosecution, nor was it authorized to produce evidence in favour of the defendants or to examine witnesses,

In the context of the HIV AIDS pandemic, gender inequality has proven fatal.

Constructive talks.

For many patients, there was little qualitative change in lifestyle.

The doctor was giving a patient a checkup.

The questions that the defence counsel intended to put were related to the subject matter of the testimony.