U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Cross Examination: A Primer for Trial Advocates

NCJ Number
108243
Journal
American Journal of Trial Advocacy Volume: 10 Dated: special issue (1987) Pages: 135-179
Author(s)
J H Hartje
Date Published
1987
Length
45 pages
Annotation
This article presents a conceptual approach to the preparation of a cross-examination and the varied approaches to cross-examination and impeachment and offers suggestions on the style, dynamics, and decisionmaking in cross-examination generally and regarding particular witnesses.
Abstract
A review of the empirical basis for cross-examination covers overt and unconscious partisanship and errors in the perception process. The latter discussion focuses on seeing, hearing, feeling, smelling, and fact acquisition; understanding and retention; and relating and retrieval. A discussion of planning for cross-examination outlines affirmative cross-examination goals and negative/discrediting cross-examination goals. Steps in organizing cross-examinations include starting on a strong point, working objectives into the organizational scheme, organizing crucial segments, asking crucial questions in an environment of maximum safety, and planning for negative cross-examination. Rules for cross-examination cover when not to cross examine, cross-examination in terms of the closing argument, making important points and satisfying objectives early in the examination, not repeating the direct examination, not asking the question if the answer is not known or if it cannot be asked with safety, and not being diverted by helpful admissions on collateral matters. Other rules include not insisting on an answer unless certain it is favorable, not attempting an experiment in the courtroom unless certain of the result, and narrowing the opportunities for the witness to explain impeaching or discrediting material. 37 footnotes.

Downloads

No download available

Availability