Client was charged with a road rage incident. It was a “he-said-she-said” case. Client was adamant that the witness was mistaken and we went to trial. After effective cross-examination of the State’s main witness (a young and inexperienced person), we were able to damage their credibility by showing the jury that the witness had a poor line of sight, and jumped to unfounded conclusions when making statements to police. Defense didn’t argue he was dishonest, but he had a partially obstructed view and only had a second or two to observe client’s behavior.
