If a defendant has no personal knowledge of the events, or of a reason that a witness may be lying or mistaken, can he provide relevant testimony?

"If a defendant has no relevant personal knowledge of the events, or of a reason that a witness may be lying or mistaken, he might have no relevant testimony to provide. No witness may give testimony based on conjecture or speculation. [Citation.] Such evidence is irrelevant because it has no tendency in reason to resolve questions in dispute. [Citation.]" (People v. Chatman, supra, 38 Cal.4th at p. 382.) However, "[a] defendant who is a percipient witness to the events at issue has personal knowledge whether other witnesses who describe those events are testifying truthfully and accurately. As a result, he might also be able to provide insight on whether witnesses whose testimony differs from his own are intentionally lying or are merely mistaken." (Ibid.) That is particularly

Page 18

true if a defendant knows these witnesses and knows of reasons why they might lie. (Ibid.)