
They bring the
witnesses into the courtroom and intimidate them against testifying
falsely, telling them that perjurious witnesses are contemptible even in
the eyes of those who hire them. Then they send out everyone but the
most prominent witness and the litigants and ask, “Tell us how do you
know that this one owes money to that one.”
If he says, “He told me, 'I owe him',” or if he says, “So-and-so told me
that he owes him,” - it is as if he said nothing. Only direct
observations are admissible, such as a loan taking place, whereas his
statements constitute hearsay. However, if he says that the defendant
appointed them as witnesses, then admitted his debt to the plaintiff, it
is acceptable. Then they bring in the second witness. The testimonies
should correspond.
The ruling of the majority of judges is accepted, but if one says “I
don't know,” they add judges, two at a time. After the verdict is
announced, the judges are not allowed to reveal individual opinions,
because of “Do not be a
gossipmonger...”
Art: Nikolaj Alekseevich Kasatkin - "In the Corridor of the District
Court"