Difference between revisions of "Cross-Examination"
From Criminal Defense Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search| Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
== Elements of a Successful Cross-Examination == | == Elements of a Successful Cross-Examination == | ||
| − | Every question in cross-examination should appeal to three aspects of the case: substantive, technical, and emotional. The criminal defense attorney must understand and use all three aspects in harmony if they are to be persuasive. Cross-examination must be substantive in that it results in testimony or facts that are related to the crime the defendant is charged with. Cross-examination questions must be technically legal under the country's rules of evidence and phrased in such a way that produce the desired answer. Finally, cross-examination questions should have an emotional impact on all three parties: the defense attorney, the witness, and the judge or jury. The emotional impact of a question flows from both the substantive nature of the question and the method of presentation. The criminal defense lawyer should know the feelings they want to create in the judge, | + | Every question in cross-examination should appeal to three aspects of the case: substantive, technical, and emotional. The criminal defense attorney must understand and use all three aspects in harmony if they are to be persuasive. Cross-examination must be substantive in that it results in testimony or facts that are related to the crime the defendant is charged with. Cross-examination questions must be technically legal under the country's rules of evidence and phrased in such a way that produce the desired answer. Finally, cross-examination questions should have an emotional impact on all three parties: the defense attorney, the witness, and the judge or jury. The emotional impact of a question flows from both the substantive nature of the question and the method of presentation. The criminal defense lawyer should know the feelings they want to create in the judge, using impact words, labels, metaphors, proverbs or nicknames to increase the emotional impact of the question. The defense attorney should consider whether their demeanor would be appropriate or accepted by the fact finder. Be tuned in to what is going on in the courtroom and be aware of the sensibilities of the fact finder. |
Cross-examination can be confrontational as when the defense attorney attacks the witness credibility by challenging the veracity of witness testimony or cross-examination may be informational as when the defense attorney presents facts, through cross-examination, that support a defense theory of the case. | Cross-examination can be confrontational as when the defense attorney attacks the witness credibility by challenging the veracity of witness testimony or cross-examination may be informational as when the defense attorney presents facts, through cross-examination, that support a defense theory of the case. | ||
