Cross Examination. High Council of Judges and Prosecutors, Republic of Turkey, Study Visit to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts June 25, 2013

Similar documents
Of Mice and Men Mock Trial Defense Attorney Packet

Of Mice and Men Mock Trial Expert Witness Packet

MacCarthy s Rules of Trial Advocacy

The following materials are the product of or adapted from Marvin Ventrell and the Juvenile Law Society with permission. All rights reserved.

If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater, for this is the testimony of God that he has borne concerning his Son.

Sample Cross-Examination Questions That the Prosecutor May Ask

The State s Case. 1. Why did fire investigators believe the cause of the fire wasn t accidental?

International Commission of Jurists

MR. NELSON: Mr. Chief Justice, may it please the Court, counsel: I m somewhat caught up in where to begin. I think perhaps the first and most

KILLER CROSS-EXAMINATION

CROSS-EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES. By Lawrence T. Bowman Kane Russell Coleman Logan PC

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR CLARK COUNTY, OHIO. v. : T.C. NO. 06 CR 1487

Child Testimony and the Right to Present a Defense

Testimony of Detective Jimmy Patterson (2)

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON Assigned on Briefs August 5, 2008

Is Negative Corpus Really a Corpse? John W. Reis, of Smith Moore Leatherwood P: E:

Rules of Evi and Objectio. Mock Trial R

OLD PATHS BAPTIST CHURCH

EXCLUSIVE: PROSECUTOR IN SERIAL 1 CASE GOES ON THE RECORD

Trial Roles. Attorney Witness Research Assistant Jury Prepare testimony with witnesses Prepare questions for crossexamination

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT MEIGS COUNTY

INSTRUCTION NO. 1 - INTRODUCTION

Matthew 28:1-10 ~ April 16, 2017 (Easter Sunday) ~ Heritage Lutheran Church

Exposing Biased Testimony On Cross. By Ben Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan

1 STATE OF WISCONSIN : CIRCUIT COURT : MANITOWOC COUNTY BRANCH PLAINTIFF, JURY TRIAL TRIAL - DAY 23 5 vs. Case No.

SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS No. CR

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS. No. 98-CF-273. Appeal from the Superior Court of the District of Columbia (F )

EXPOSING THE MONSTER: EFFECTIVE CROSS-EXAMINATION

Murphy v. State, 773 So.2d 1174 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) (en banc). Affirmed.

GENERAL DEPOSITION GUIDELINES

Both Hollingsworth and Schroeder testified that as Branch Davidians, they thought that God's true believers were

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO HAMILTON COUNTY, OHIO

Michael Duane Zack III v. State of Florida

Prosecutor grilled, Bevilacqua deflected, grand jury testimony from 2003 shows

DEPOSITION INSTRUCTIONS

Anticipatory Guide. Explanation. Statement. I Agree. Disagree

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS

By Hillel Kuttler Day 1 of trial Date: Mon Mar 20, :53:35 Copyright 2000 By The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.

21 January 2018 Epiphany 3. The Law Is Written on the Heart

United States Court of Appeals

Sue Fahami Craig Denney The Honorable Scott Freeman Mary Boetsch Carla Higginbotham Michael Large

PETITION FOR PARDONS OF INNOCENCE

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P 65.37

In the Provincial Court of British Columbia

Am I free? Freedom vs. Fate

Relating to Electricity, 1885, Vol 33. makes more sense that they married in Utah Territory.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI PATRICK BERNARD GILES NO KA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE

This testimony of the Advocate, much more than the testimony and defense by a dedicated, strong, and tough lawyer, is a matter of life and death.

VOIR DIRE: THE ART AND SCIENCE OF JURY SELECTION

The Secrets of Cross-Examination

JANUARY 22, 2014 STATE OF LOUISIANA NO KA-0397 VERSUS COURT OF APPEAL EDWARD AUGUSTINE FOURTH CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * * * *

The Privilege of Self-examination Rosh Hashanah, Day Two September 15, Tishrei 5776 Rabbi Van Lanckton Temple B nai Shalom Braintree, Massachus

Reasons for Belief Session 1 I Struggle With Doubt. Is That OK?

Is Faith Worth Believing?

o Stam is not clear that he knew Richard s position on the King James Bible (KJB) before asking him to come and work for him in the late 1970s.

grassroots, and the letters are still coming forward, and if anyone s going listen, I do hold out hope that it s these commissioners.

10.47am: Justice Byrne first summarised the defence case for the jury.

The Inward Testimony of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God s children.

Perjury Warrant Denied Against Former DPD Deputy Chief James Tolbert

They were all accompanied outside the house, from that moment on nobody entered again.

A CONVICTION INTEGRITY INITIATIVE. Cyrus R. Vance, Jr.*

How do we know what s true?

Thomas Peterson Testified August 29, 2012 Defense Witness

IN COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND RELEASED NOTICE. August 19, No STAN SMITH, INC., PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

Page 1 of 48 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR HAWKINS COUNTY, STATE OF LONE STAR CRIMINAL DIVISION STATE OF LONE STAR )

Bar Mock Trial Competition 2017/18. Student Role Guide: Barrister England, Wales and Northern Ireland

Contents Faith and Science

The Testimony Cultivating Authentic Christian Community 1 John 5:6-12 Pastor Bryan Clark

Decided: February 6, S16A1781. SMITH v. THE STATE. Appellant Christopher Rayshun Smith was tried and convicted of murder

Seth Penalver v. State of Florida

King David on Trial Created by Rabbi Eve Rudin Weiner

STUDY GUIDE. Jesus Is Unique #1 (Jesus Claimed to be God)

Key Scripture. Consider & Prepare

STATE OF OHIO DONTA SMITH

Paul Fitzpatrick v. State of Florida

Gospel of Mark Lesson 1

>> ALL RISE. >> SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA IS NOW IN SESSION. >> OKAY. GOOD MORNING. THE NEXT CASE ON THE DOCKET IS BROOKINS V. STATE. COUNSEL?

This is a public notice to Mr. Dirk Laureyssens and it has been registered

No Plaintiff and Appellant, Defendant and Respondent.

Or maybe that s the wrong question.

1 STATE OF WISCONSIN : CIRCUIT COURT : MANITOWOC COUNTY BRANCH vs. Case No. 05 CF 381

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

Jesus Magnified. Luke 23

STATE OF OHIO ERIC SMITH

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS. No. 94-CF Appeal from the Superior Court of the District of Columbia

VOIR DIRE: THE ART AND SCIENCE OF JURY SELECTION

Presumed Innocent The Burden Of Proof By Scott. Turow

Lifted Up! The Great White Throne Judgement

What Are We Telling the Kids? Teaching Genesis to Teenagers

Apologetics Through Uncommon Research

Effectively Examining the Difficult Witness

The Life of Martin Luther Sunday School lesson

Post-Dawn Trial Of Jesus Before Sanhedrin Lesson 5

Supreme Court of Florida

>> ALL RISE. SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA IS NOW IN SESSION. PLEASE BE SEATED. >> GOOD MORNING TO BOTH OF YOU. THE LAST CASE THIS WEEK IS CALLOWAY V.

Verdicts: Trial D. The Church banned his Dialogue. The book remained banned for the next 200 years.

Follow the leader. Watch the Video. Joshua 1:1-18. Notes

EXECUTION AND INVENTION: DEATH PENALTY DISCOURSE IN EARLY RABBINIC. Press Pp $ ISBN:

Introduction to Law Chapter 1 Sec. 2 Notes The Evolution of Western Legal Theory

Transcription:

Cross Examination High Council of Judges and Prosecutors, Republic of Turkey, Study Visit to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts June 25, 2013 Dan Small Holland & Knight dan.small@hklaw.com 23600380.1 Copyright 2013 Holland & Knight LLP All Rights Reserved

Cross-Examination I. Nature II. Purposes III. Methods 2

I. Nature of Cross A. Starting Point Trial: Search for Truth 3

Search for Truth The plain and simple truth is rarely plain and never simple. ~ Oscar Wilde Irish Author, 1895 4

1. Language B. Obstacles to the Search For Truth 2. Assumptions 3. Perspective 4. Dishonesty - The Answer: Ask More Carefully 5

B. Obstacles 1. Language The Twins and the Test 6

B. Obstacles 2. Assumptions Example: If it is written, it must be true. 7

2. Assumptions Document Issues 1. Credibility 2. Language 3. Context 8

9

B. Obstacles 3. Perspective Every truth has two sides; It is well to look at both, before we commit ourselves to either ~ Aesop (Ancient Fableist, 620-560 BC) 10

11

12

13

B. Obstacles 4. Dishonesty Darkness cannot drive out darkness. Only light can do that. ~ Martin Luther King, Jr. 14

Search For Truth From a Picture Look more carefully From a Person Ask more carefully 15

C. Ask More Carefully Trial : act or process of testing, 15 th Century separate out (the good) by examination. From Gallo-Roman triare, 12 th Century -- Etymology Dictionary 16

Opening Statements Prosecution Witness(es) Direct Cross Re-Direct Defense Witness(es) Direct Cross Re-Direct Closing Arguments Judge s Instructions Deliberations and Verdict Common U.S. Trial 17

Direct Examination Ask More Carefully the first examination of a witness by the party calling the witness Webster s Dictionary Cross-Examination the examination of a witness who has already testified in order to check or discredit the witness s testimony, knowledge, or credibility Webster s Dictionary 18

Search for Truth United States Constitution in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to be confronted with the witnesses against him. - Confrontation Clause - Sixth Amendment 19

Search for Truth 20

D. Cross Examination Benefits Judges Control Information Perspective Prosecution Information Defense Witnesses Skills Defense Information Testing Skills 21

II. Purposes of Cross A) Bring out helpful facts B) Challenge witness credibility C) Challenge witness testimony 22

Purposes of Cross A) Helpful Testimony 1) Admissions 2) Positives 3) Context 23

24

25

Purposes of Cross B. Challenge Witness Credibility Impeachment: Matters affecting the credibility of the witness. -FRE 611(b) Credibility: The Quality of Being Trusted and Believed In. - Oxford Dictionary 26

B. Challenge Witness Credibility 1) Bias Impeachment Common Types 2) Inconsistent Statements 3) Prior History 27

1) Bias Bias - Predisposition Interest - Relationship Motive - Personal Reasons 28

2) Prior Inconsistent Statements Always tell the truth, It makes it easier to remember, what you said the first time. ~ Mark Twain American Author, 1894 29

INSERT VIDEO - Philadelphia Video 30

2) Prior Inconsistent Statements 3C s Commit - to current statement Credit - the prior statement Confront - with inconsistency 31

3) Prior History Convictions Bad Acts 32

C. Challenge Witness Testimony Common Types 1) Memory 2) Observation 3) Contradictory Facts 33

1) Memory Time Common Event Context 34

2) Observation Capacity Circumstances Understanding Time/Distance 35

INSERT VIDEO - My Cousin Vinny Mrs. Reilly 36

3) Contradictory Facts The light was Green. The light was Red. 37

III. Methods of Cross DO NOT: 1) Repeat 2) Argue 3) Explore 38

III. Methods of Cross Direct Examination Purpose Cross Examination Purpose - Focus on Witness - Focus on Lawyer - Tell Witness Story - Make Cross Points Methods Methods - Open Questions - Closed Questions - Who, What, When, - Leading Why, Where, How - Witness Initiative - Control Witness 39

III. Methods of Cross Purpose: Add, Challenge, Test Method: Leading Questions - Contain Answers Example: Non-Leading: Q: What is the date today? A: I think today is June 23. Leading Q: Today is June 25, isn t that correct? A: Yes. 40

III. Methods of Cross Clear, Simple Statements: 5-7 Words Maximum 1 Fact per Question No Quibble Words Don t ask 1, when you should ask 4 Goals: (1) Yes or No Answers (2) Tell The Story 41

Q&A Story-telling Exercise Favorite Fairy Tale/Children s Story 42

Yes or No? Cross Examination 43

Cross Examination Yes or No? Why Not? Too Long Too Complicated Too Compound Too Vague Too Dependent Too Speculative 44

Irving Younger The Ten Commandments of Cross-Examination 1. Be brief 2. Ask short questions, using plain words. 3. Ask leading questions. 4. Ask only questions to which you already know the answers. 5. Don t let the witness merely repeat his direct testimony. 6. Don t let the witness explain. 7. Listen to the witness s answer. 8. Don t quarrel with the witness. 9. Avoid the one question too many. 10. Save the argument for summation.

II. Purposes of Cross A) Bring out helpful facts B) Challenge witness credibility C) Challenge witness testimony 46

Conclusion [Cross-examination] is beyond any doubt the greatest legal engine ever invented for the discovery of truth.... John H. Wigmore, U.S. Legal Scholar (1904) 47