You stated: "and can I infer what he would've said?"
This has a different meaning than: " I could say what occurred between us, if he's not there."
I am sorry, but I am having trouble interpreting your follow ups. I am trying.
You cannot "infer" what would have been said. That is, "predict." That is what infer means. And you cannot.
You CAN say what the conversation was, however, if it actually took place and is pertinent to the matter.Properly introduced of the files, is what I'm asking you..after 1 witness, I can just ask the court to admit this file as it corroberates what you all just heard and adds, some details not heard to it. Is that how to get it admitted?
Introduction of evidence is very complicated. No, not quite. Normally, you would have to get on the stand and explain where the file came from. This is called authentication. Only once it is authenticated can be be entered into evidence. Ergo, you would need to be on the stand to authenticate the file and have it admitted. For a generic manual on authentication, see here
, please.the default judgement I would just ask after all the testimony? These last 2 items are important if you could detail a bit., especially the file.
No. If they simply do not show, you can ask for a default judgment just by them not showing up to Court. It is like a team not showing up for the game. The other team does not have to kick goals into the net, still - the game is over if the other team does not show up.