A defense attorney may ask questions during cross-examination to challenge the credibility of a witness by questioning their consistency, bias, motives, and ability to perceive or remember events accurately. They may also inquire about any prior inconsistent statements or behavior that could undermine the witness's reliability.
The defense tries to create doubt in the minds of the jury.
The first series of questions asked by the prosecutor or defense attorney during their case presentation typically involves establishing the credibility and background of key witnesses. These questions often include inquiries about the witness's name, occupation, relationship to the case, and any relevant experience or qualifications. This foundational questioning aims to build the witness's credibility and lay the groundwork for their testimony, ensuring the jury understands the context and relevance of the information being presented.
When a prosecutor calls a witness, the witness is sworn in and then provides testimony relevant to the case. The prosecutor conducts direct examination, asking questions to elicit information that supports the prosecution's arguments. The defense attorney may then cross-examine the witness to challenge their credibility or the accuracy of their testimony. This process helps establish facts and build the case for the prosecution.
A prior conviction does not prohibit a person from testifying. Certain convictions may be used to challenge the credibility of a witness before the jury. Whether or not a witness is called to testify is the decision of the lead attorney who would call the witness.
During a trial, witnesses are typically questioned by the attorneys through a process called direct examination and cross-examination. The attorney who called the witness asks questions first (direct examination), followed by the opposing attorney who asks questions to challenge the witness's testimony (cross-examination). The judge may also allow redirect examination by the first attorney to clarify any points raised during cross-examination. The questions must be relevant to the case and follow the rules of evidence.
The attorney asked several questions of the witnes.
When a witness is called to the stand in a trial - the replies he gives to the first round of questioning he undergoes is called his direct testimony. When the opposing attorney gets to ask him questions he is said to be cross-examining him. Then, if the cross-examination raised some new questions in the first attorney's mind he might question him a second time - this is known as giving re-direct testimony. Then - if the opposing attorney follows up with more of his own questions he is said to be re-cross-examining.
When his prediction of an attempted communist takeover did not come true.
You need to put more information into your question.
Yes, he could try to challenge it.
Both direct-examination and cross-examination are important in a trial. Direct-examination allows the attorney to present their case and their witness's testimony, while cross-examination gives the opposing attorney the opportunity to challenge the witness's credibility and testimony. They both serve different purposes in the trial process and are equally important.
The Attorney General may want to call a witness to gather crucial information or testimony related to a legal case or investigation. This could be to strengthen the government’s position, clarify facts, or challenge the credibility of opposing evidence. Additionally, calling a witness could help ensure that justice is served by providing a comprehensive understanding of the issues at hand.