To ask for clarification, to expose weaknesses in the argument or evidence, to discredit the witness, or to elicit facts favorable to the party the cross-examiner is representing.
"Indeed, cross-examination is arguably the essential, if not sole, purpose of a criminal trial. Opening statements, the importance of which so many lawyers underestimate, is the foundation of effective cross-examination. The opening is where the lawyer not only provides the jury with the defense's version of the facts, but details how he will cross-examine prosecution witnesses. If the lawyer wastes the invaluable opportunity afforded by the opening, leaves critical "facts" unchallenged, neglects to cite examples of the witness's duplicity, and fails to tell the jury how he will cross-examine the witnesses, it's unlikely the jury will grasp the significance of otherwise effective cross-examination."
Direct examination and cross examination occur during the trial phase known as the presentation of evidence.
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 who calls the witness conducts a direct examination. The opposing attorney may then conduct a cross examination. The first attorney may then conduct a redirect exam, whereupon the opposing attorney may conduct a recross exam.
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.
Cross examination provides the opportunity challenge "direct testimony" given by a witness. It is a fact finding mission. It is a way to expand on the testimony and get to "the rest of the story". You can't assume that witness testimony is without bias, is full on omissions or is just plain perjury. Within the legal scope of cross examination, you can ask questions that force the witness to reveal more information that can bring a new light to the testimony and its context.
clarify fuzzy areas and probe weaknesses
create doubt in the judge
create doubt in the judge
Redirect examination is when an attorney asks follow-up questions to a witness after the opposing attorney has completed their cross-examination. The purpose is to clarify any points raised during cross-examination and to reinforce the witness's credibility or testimony. It is limited to addressing issues raised during cross-examination and cannot introduce new topics.
Yes, leading questions are usually allowed during cross-examination. The purpose of cross-examination is to challenge the witness's testimony and credibility, and leading questions can help steer the witness toward a particular line of questioning or point.
The plural form of cross-examination is cross-examinations.
The plural form of cross-examination is cross-examinations.
The Art of Cross-Examination was created in 1903.
The witness was not prepared for the defense attorney's brutal cross examination.
Cross Examination Debate Association was created in 1971.
cross-examination
The ISBN of Gandhi Under Cross Examination is 0981499228.