Preview

Cross Examination Techniques

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
15440 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Cross Examination Techniques
Tuesday, April 04, 2006

A. Control in Cross-Examination

No skill of the trial advocate epitomizes adversarial confrontation as dramatically or significantly as that of cross-examination. An ancient legal maxim states that there is never an outcome of a cause contested that is not mainly dependent on the advocate's skill in cross-examination.
Over the centuries of testing the veracity of witnesses by cross-examination, from Socrates' masterful questioning of his accuser Miletus through the trials that fill courtrooms today, the skills required of the advocate have developed into principles that can be learned, practiced, and mastered by the diligent advocate. The timeless nature of the adversarial skills required of the cross-examiner was recognized by the eminent New York trial lawyer, Francis Wellman, 90 years ago in his excellent treatise on the Art of Cross-Examination: It requires the greatest ingenuity; a habit of logical thought; clearness of perception in general; infinite patience and self-control; power to read men's minds intuitively, to judge their characters by their faces, to appreciate their motives; ability to act with force and precision; a masterful knowledge of the subject matter itself; and extreme caution; and, above all, the instinct to discover the weak point in the witness under examination.1
Consequently, cross-examination is the most difficult of the adversarial skills to acquire. Once mastered, however, it is also the most significant skill, since it is from the crucible of cross-examination that truth most often emerges. As with all significant skills, mastery of the basic principles and techniques must combine with hard-earned experience to mould the neophyte into a seasoned cross-examiner. The purpose of this chapter is to present an overview of several principles and techniques of cross-examination that have been passed to our generation from the master advocates who have preceded us.
Top of Page

B. Silent Cross-Examination

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    From the beginning of our journey through the Reptile we are constantly asking ourselves one question: “Why should Bubba Care about my Case?” The reason we ask that question stems from the “Why we Lose at Trial” stool. This stool tells us that reason we lose at trial is because of compassion fatigue, tort reform, and negative attribution. The jury comes to the courtroom tainted with these afflictions, without us making a single argument or admitting a single piece of evidence. These afflictions stem from their everyday experiences, expectations of society, and their hopes for the future.…

    • 255 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    To be able to properly analyze these claims, however, the definitions of an expert and a pure fact must be established. An expert will be defined as someone who is trained or selected to fulfil a particular role. While this definition may be flexible, it encompasses all experts that will be discussed, namely historians, lawyers, and jurors. In the context of this essay, evidence is defined as an undisputable fact which allows for conclusions to be drawn which are disputable.…

    • 1464 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    This process is where witnesses are called to give their statements. They are questioned and cross examined by all lawyers/attorneys. Cross examination is being questioned by each lawyer/attorney they may ask the same questions but in different words. The prosecutor is there to make the jury believe the criminal is guilty whereas the defense attorney is there to make the jury question if the criminal is really guilty. There are also three types of witnesses which are; ordinary witnesses, expert witnesses, and character witnesses. “Ordinary witnesses can testify only as to their personal observations. Expert witnesses, on the other hand, are allowed to offer their opinions in their area of expertise. Chartacter witnesses may testify only to the general good reputation of the defendant” (Zalman,…

    • 920 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Cross-examination is critical during litigation. Many cases have to be proven based on solely witness testimony because of the lack of physical evidence. Therefore, the responsibility of a witness to tell the truth relies on methods to encourage witnesses to maintain their credibility. According to Gardner and Anderson in their book Criminal Evidence: Principles and Cases, the witnesses must take an oath or affirmation that their say will be true and the witnesses must be personally present at the trial in order to ensure the right to confront as stated in the Sixth Amendment. Finally, witnesses are subject to cross-examination. But if it is found that the witness lies, he or she is taking the risk to be charged with perjury or in contempt if the witness refuses to answer a question, unless it is protected by privilege (Gardner and Anderson, 2010).…

    • 420 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    1.06 Review

    • 379 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Criteria used to establish an expert witness might be the person’s degrees, and the number of years of experience that that person has in the field…

    • 379 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    BUSI301 TEST QUESTION

    • 2171 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Perhaps the most universal of the maxims is the notion that the law favors those who exercise vigilance in pursuing their claims and disfavors those who rest on their legal rights by failing to act to protect their rights in a reasonable period of time…

    • 2171 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    PSY328 final proposal

    • 1936 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Luus, C. A. E., Wells, G. L., & Turtle, J. W. (1995). Child eyewitnesses: Seeing is believing.…

    • 1936 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Criminals are tried in our court system everyday for crimes they are accused of committing. In these court cases, witnesses are called to give an account of what happened in the particular incident and then a jury of twelve members decides the criminal's ruling on the case. The jury does not listen to just one witness; it takes into account the stories of many witnesses in order to decipher the truth. "The Story of an Hour" by Kate Chopin and "Richard Cory" by Edwin Arlington Robinson show one cannot fully rely on what other people say in certain situations.…

    • 501 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The study of Law and the process of Judicial Rhetoric are two concepts that have been around since the days of Aristotle. While both have transitioned with time, the core of both of them have stayed the same. Where there is law, there has to be some sort of Judicial process. This procedure is how justice is administered and Truth is upheld in a society. You can not look at one of these ideas without the other. However, 15 pages is not nearly enough space to encompass such broad topics. Therefore, this paper will focus on primarily “interrogational/ inquisitive” Rhetoric used by Lawyers in a court setting. More specifically, it will focus on S.C. Representative Trey Gowdy’s questioning of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton regarding the Benghazi incident of 2012. Rep. Gowdy heads the Benghazi committee that was established to find out who was responsible for the 2012 attack on the American Consul in Benghazi that killed four American…

    • 957 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Bibliography: Booth, Anthony Robert. "The Two Faces of Evidentialism." Erkenntnis 67:3 (2007), http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/docview/195447959 (accessed January 18, 2013).…

    • 981 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Of good procesuctor and good defense attorney-good listening skills, understanding facts, advocating for their client, and willingness to give 100% to their client.…

    • 384 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Best Defense Analysis

    • 1067 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Alan M. Dershowitz’s (1983) legal memoir The Best Defense reveals most lawyers and judges would rather win than expose the truth. As a law professor, Dershowitz (1983) recognized students, journalists, instructors and other non-lawyers were often “outsiders” (“Introduction,” xiii) because they studied, wrote, taught, or read about the law, but they rarely had the opportunity to understand the law from judicial perspectives. On the other hand, as an appellate attorney, Dershowitz understood the law and how it operated within courtrooms, so he was able to reveal the prevalent dishonesty of judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and guilty defendants because it is the dishonesty that is usually kept…

    • 1067 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The use of eyewitnesses has been a constant in of criminal justice system since its very beginning. Unfortunately, people do not make the best witnesses to a crime. The person may not have seen the actual criminal, but someone that looks similar to them. The witness may lie about what he or she may have scene. Also the witness can be influenced by the police as to who or what they saw at the time of the crime. The witness or victims memory of the person may have faded so that they don't remember exactly what had seen, which could be disastrous for the accused.…

    • 436 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Wrongful Convictions

    • 1087 Words
    • 5 Pages

    way. Honest attorneys present all evidence and information that has been gathered for the case.…

    • 1087 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The film “12 Angry Men” is a 1957 drama consisting of a dozen men on jury, who attempt to reach a verdict involving a teenager in a murder case. A guilty verdict was initially predicted, but the jury members start questioning and reasoning the testimonies given in court. Was the boy being accused of stabbing his father really guilty? All the information regarding the timing of the train, the timing of the murder, and the testimonies did not add up. Through much debate, a complex voting process, and many concepts learned through SCOM, the jury managed to attain a not-guilty ruling due to the inadequate testimonies and facts gathered.…

    • 1027 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays

Related Topics