I once heard that an actor’s testimony can not be validated. I have no idea whether this notion has any reference, but I suggest it’s merely a point of view, likely as a reference to the lack of credibility.
Acting is a talent before being a profession. How many actors are there in the world? Countless, right? But how many are truely talented? Just a few, wouldn’t you agree?
The talented will make you weep, scream, laugh, hate, love, and sympathise with them. Above all, they make you believe whatever they’re giving you. The untalented will make you neutral, if not bored.
Perhaps, this is why some think that a real actor’s testimony might be considered invalid. After all, the courtroom can’t be a stage, and truth can’t be dramatised. Truth has to be proved with competent, relevant, credible, and unbiased testimony.
Have you ever noticed how many writers make it clear from the very beginning of their novels that it’s all fictional? They don’t want to mislead their readers, to bear no responsibility if things were not accurate. While the story and characters may reflect something or someone in real life, it’s all based on imagination.
Truth can’t be imagined, but imagination cam help us see the truth.
What do you think? Are you still reading? Pray tell, you are!
By the way, there are many unknown actors who perform better in real life than on the stage. They are professional, but not talented. Ironically, they can’t be exempt from giving testimony. Hopefully, the judge, would never be one.
With all the best wishes,
Nahla
Pure and Simple 