Description
Highlights:
Part I:
Credibility as viewed by the Parties:
Where a foreman and an employee scuffle and it is the foreman’s word against the employee’s with no other evidence, the arbitrator will use his life experience to gauge who is truthful. Nonetheless, the weight of arbitral opinion would favor the foreman.
Credibility Issues as Perceived by the Advocates:
Witness demeanor is not conclusive.
Too much consistency can indicate testimony is rehearsed.
Outside records can be used to attack credibility.
Personal and institutional interests should be considered.
Part II:
Credibility as viewed by the Arbitrator:
Credibility is more detection of an honestly believed distortion.
Demeanor is unreliable.
Forthright testimony is more credible than evasive.
Consistency with earlier statements is indicative.
Credibility Techniques Used by Arbitrators:
“Inherent Probability” is used where two witnesses give differing accounts, but there is agreement at junctures.
Perceiving the interest of the witness.
Using intuition emanating from the life experience.
