Credibility
Defined in 7 dictionaries — Cyclopedic (1922), Ballentine's (1916), Bouvier (1914), Black's (1910), Kinney (1893), Black's (1891), Bouvier (1839)
The Cyclopedic Law Dictionary
Walter A. Shumaker and George Foster Longsdorf; ed. James C. Cahill · 1922
In a witness. Worthiness of belief, as distinguished from competency or capacity to testify.
Ballentine's Law Dictionary
James A. Ballentine · 1916
Bouvier's Law Dictionary and Concise Encyclopedia
John Bouvier; revised by Francis Rawle · 1914
Worthiness o« The credibility of witnesses Ls a que Ron for the jury to determine, as their compi is for the court; Best, Ev. § 76; 1 Greenl. Ev. §§ 49, 425; Tayl. Ev. 1257. See Impeachment.
Black's Law Dictionary
Henry Campbell Black, M.A. · 1910
Worthiness of belief; that quality in a witness which renders his evidence worthy of belief. After the competence of a witness is allowed, the consideration of his credibility arises, and not bsfore. 3 Bl. Comm. 369; 1 Burrows, 414, 417; Smith v. Jones, 68 Vt. 132, 34 Atl. 424. As to the distinction between competency and credibility, see Competency.
Defined under Credible in Black's Law Dictionary.
A Law Dictionary and Glossary
George C. Kinney · 1893
Worthiness of belief; that quality in a witness which renders his evidence worthy of belief.
A Dictionary of Law
Henry Campbell Black · 1891
Worthiness of belief; that quality in a witness which renders his evidence worthy of belief. After the competence of a witness is allowed, the consideration of his credibility arises, and not be- As to the distinction between competency and credibility, see COMPETENCY.
A Law Dictionary, Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States
John Bouvier · 1839
worthiness of belief. Toentitle a witness to credibility, he must be competent. Vide Competency. Human _ testimony can never acquire the certainty of demonstration. Witnesses not unfrequently are mistaken or wish to deceive; the most that can be expected is that moral certainty which arises from analogy. The credibility which is attached to such testimony, arises from the double presumption that the witnesses have good sense and intelligence, and that they are not mistaken or déceived; they are further presumed to have probity, and that they do not wish to deceive. To gain credibility, we must be assured, first, that the witness has not been mistaken or deceived; to be assured as far as possible on this subject, it is proper to consider the nature and quality of the facts proved; the quality and person of the witness; the testimony in itself; and to compare it with the depositions of other witnesses on the subject, and with known facts. Secondly, we must be satisfied that he does not wish to deceive; there are strong assurances of this, when the witness is under oath, is a man of integrity, and disinterested. Vide Arch. Civ. Pl. 444; 5 Com. Dig. 449.