Patriots

While the British Army tried to enforce strict discipline, the Red Coat men had little self-discipline in themselves. Gambling, pandering and fighting over local women, corruption and heavy drinking were very common. The Red Coats also had to endure out-of-place logistics, food supplies and artillery replenishment.

In the United States, “Redcoat” is associated in cultural memory with the British soldiers who fought against the Patriots during the American Revolutionary War. The Library of Congress possesses several examples of the uniforms the British Army used during this time.

The British Redcoat was very effective because they were professional and very well trained. What they lacked in numbers they made up for in professionalism,discipline, and training. They were the only army as far as i know that trained with live ammo.

: a British soldier especially in America during the Revolutionary War.

White hair suggested age, experience and wisdom. Long hair suggested good health. As such, it was customary for Judges to wear white wigs. In a similar fashion, other males, particularly those in positions of leadership (such as officers), wore white wigs.

George Washington

Victims hid their baldness, as well as the bloody sores that scoured their faces, with wigs made of horse, goat, or human hair. Perukes were also coated with powder—scented with lavender or orange—to hide any funky aromas.

Like many uniforms, wigs are an emblem of anonymity, an attempt to distance the wearer from personal involvement and a way to visually draw on the supremacy of the law, says Newton. Wigs are so much a part of British criminal courts that if a barrister doesn’t wear a wig, it’s seen as an insult to the court.

American judges stopped wearing wigs in the early 19th century, and this was partly to show that the US was republican and democratic.

Neither the judges nor the lawyers wear wigs. Both judges and lawyers wear a long black robe termed as the ‘gown’. Lawyers are supposed to wear a gown having the barrister’s pouch at the back.

The Wig. The culture of lawyers wearing wigs in court actually has its roots in, believe it or not, fashion! Those who wore wigs in order to hide the fact that they were getting bald. Those who wore wigs because they had shaved their hair in order to prevent infestations (lice infestations was a big worry back then).

There are a number of reasons why barristers still wear wigs. The most accepted is that it brings a sense of formality and solemnity to proceedings. By wearing a gown and wig, a barrister represents the rich history of common law and the supremacy of the law over the proceedings.

Black means that Lawyers are meticulous with their opinions, thoughts, interpretation of the law and processes and that. Black goes well with other colour. White was chosen as the colour to complement Black because White signifies peace, purity, goodness and innocence.

Judges do not wear wigs in the US, Canada, Australia, India or New Zealand, except on ceremonial occasions in the case of New Zealand.

Judges need to act anonymously while adjudging in the court. The only factors to be taken into consideration should be the facts of the lawyers and with cases. Thus, wearing wigs enhances the anonymous behavior of judges in the court with the clients so that the personal life of a judge does not affect the case.

Soon after Independence, India decided to jettison wigs, which were incredibly uncomfortable in our blistering temperatures. It might seem that this was a no-brainer. But bear in mind, Sri Lankan judges and lawyers still wear wigs on ceremonial occasions.

Types of legal evidence include testimony, documentary evidence, and physical evidence. Evidence and rules are used to decide questions of fact that are disputed, some of which may be determined by the legal burden of proof relevant to the case.

There are four types evidence by which facts can be proven or disproven at trial which include: Real evidence; Demonstrative evidence; Documentary evidence; and. Testimonial evidence.

Generally speaking, there are four main kinds of evidence. These are testimonial, documentary, demonstrative, and what’s called real evidence.

Preponderance of the evidence requires tipping the scales of justice just over 50%, like 50.01%. Proof by a preponderance of the evidence is required in nearly all negligence cases, accident cases and injury cases even where damages are catastrophic.

If you lack sufficient relevant and admissible evidence, you do not proceed to a jury trial. No. Proving a case beyond a reasonable doubt (the standard of proof required in a criminal case) is always an up-hill climb. If you lack sufficient relevant and admissible evidence, you do not proceed to a jury trial.

Under the “silent witness” theory, photographic evidence is admissible if the process used to produce the photograph is accurate and reputable. Thus, before photographic evidence is used at trial, the trial attorney must consider the purpose of the photographic evidence and the need for expert testimony.

Text message conversations must contain relevant, admissible evidence and you must take steps to properly preserve the authenticity of the text messages or else you may not be able to use them as evidence. Like most pieces of evidence, text messages are not automatically admissible in court.

In many jurisdictions, cameras are not allowed in courtrooms in order to prevent distractions and preserve privacy. This requires news media to rely on sketch artists for illustrations of the proceedings.