Mock Trial Objections. The basics of every objection allowed in the Mock Trial universe.

Similar documents
Rules of Evi and Objectio. Mock Trial R

Evidence Transcript Style Essay - Bar None Review Essay Handout QUESTION 3

COURT: Simplified Rules of Evidence

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

GENERAL DEPOSITION GUIDELINES

Testimony of Detective Jimmy Patterson (2)

NOVEMBER 1, 2005 Isaiah 43:10(a) You are MY witnesses, declares the

Case: 1:13-cv Document #: 107 Filed: 04/06/17 Page 1 of 15 PageID #:1817

On June 26, 2014, Waleed ( "Wally ") Hamed (referred to as "Counterclaim

International Bible Lessons Commentary Matthew 21:1-17

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

MOCK TRIAL SCRIPT. B.B. WOLF (a/k/a Big Bad Wolf) CURLY PIG

PAGES: 1-24 EXHIBITS: 0. Sanjeev Lath vs. City of Manchester, NH DEPOSITION OF PATROL OFFICER AUSTIN R. GOODMAN

2 THE COURT: All right. Please raise your. 5 having been first duly sworn, testified as follows: 6 THE COURT: All right, sir.

>> THE NEXT CASE IS STATE OF FLORIDA VERSUS FLOYD. >> TAKE YOUR TIME. TAKE YOUR TIME. >> THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. >> WHENEVER YOU'RE READY.

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

Fundamentals of Pre-Trial Practice

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM v. Case No. 5D

Being Fair In An Unfair World. Selected Ecclesiastes

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE Assigned on Briefs July 27, 2010

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

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE. CANADA ) HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN ) PROVINCE OF ONTARIO ) against ) YOURTOWN REGION ) MARCEL(LE) LECOUTEAU

Standard Terminology for Expressing Conclusions of Forensic Document Examiners

DEPOSITION INSTRUCTIONS

2017 National Mock Trial Questions and Answers (Revised May 1, 2017) Week of April 3, 2017

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI AT INDEPENDENCE COMPLAINT. Count I. Murder 2nd Degree ( Y )

THE KEY TO AN EFFECTIVE EXAMINATION: FOCUSING ON THE WITNESS ANSWERS, AND ASKING APPROPRIATE FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS

What is going on here? Who is speaking, and to whom are they speaking? What are the people and places involved? What are the details?

JD EXAM INSTRUCTIONS, SAMPLE QUESTIONS and ANSWERS

Consider... Ethical Egoism. Rachels. Consider... Theories about Human Motivations

John Paul-Jones Document index

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRANDY NICOLE WILLIAMS NO KA-1839-COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI

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

/10/2007, In the matter of Theodore Smith Associated Reporters Int'l., Inc. Page 1419

Putting on Mock Trials

Power Struggle. Vienna Presbyterian Church The Rev. Dr. Peter G. James Acts 4:1-13

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CARBON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CRIMINAL DIVISION MEMORANDUM OPINION

BOOK REVIEW. Andrew Wood, M.S. University of Central Florida

PREPARING LAY WITNESSES FOR TRIAL

the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary Public Complaints Regulations

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

IT WORKS. A concise, definite, resultful plan with rules, explanations and suggestions for bettering your conditions in life.

Name: First Middle Last. Other names used (alias, maiden, nickname): Current Address: Street/P.O. Box City State Zip Code

The Foundation of Ministry

Marc James Asay v. Michael W. Moore

Pilate's Extended Dialogues in the Gospel of John: Did the Evangelist alter a written source?

THE HOLY SPIRIT AS ADVOCATE John 15:26-16:11

Seth Penalver v. State of Florida

Sample Cross-Examination Questions That the Prosecutor May Ask

General Information about the Mock Trial

1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Helpful Hints for doing Philosophy Papers (Spring 2000)

AIDING THE ENEMY. Peg Tittle

A & T TRANSCRIPTS (720)

Talkin' to America. Interview with Doug Friesen - Part 2 August 5th 2009

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO KA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE

Evangelism Week 1. GRC ACE Hour (11 Oct 2015) Mo Hanna & John Chung

Challenge: To be convicted to love.

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/01/ :24 AM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 431 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/01/2018

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE. CANADA ) HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN ) PROVINCE OF ONTARIO ) against ) YOURTOWN REGION ) MARCEL(LE) LECOUTEAU

Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission Agenda Item 9 for Telephonic Business Meeting of October 12, 2010 Clayton and Moody s Letters MEMORANDUM

The First 2,000 Years (The Thousand Years Book 1) PDF

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

NEW YORK CITY OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE TRIALS AND HEARINGS

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

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

REASONS FOR DECISION OF ROBERT BURGENER HEARING JUNE 26 and 27, 2006

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

Wesley Harris: An Account of Escaping Slavery

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT January Term 2010

The Crucifixion & the Criminals

The Odds of Eight Messianic Prophecies Coming True

The Final Word on Salvation Preached at 8.15 and on 23 rd November 2014

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/20/2013 INDEX NO /2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 39 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/20/2013 EXHIBITB

KINGDOM STEWARDSHIP CONVERSATIONS. An exclusive member benefit of Kingdom Advisors. KingdomAdvisors.org

February 2018 Bar Examination

What is the Christian Gospel Date: Reading: John 1 to 3

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

Make sure you are properly registered Course web page : or through Class Notes link from University Page Assignment #1 is due

Originally presented at Men s Breakfast Devotional 5/2013 Edited for reading 10/2013

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

The Trial of Jesus Intro

Practice Problems add commas where needed in the following sentences:

TESTIMONY FROM YOUR OWN WITNESSES: DIRECT EXAMINATION STRATEGIES

Jesus Sayings That Challenge Us

>> SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA IS NOW IN SESSION. PLEASE BE SEATED. >> THANK YOU. THE NEXT CASE ON THE DOCKET IS HALL V. STATE. WHENEVER OR YOU'RE

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

My brother. as tears rolled down my face. I said this because I was put into. the figure four for at least 20 minutes. The figure four is when

INTELLIGENCE UNDER THE LAW

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

The Church: A Society of Servants

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

It Works. By RHJ. The Famous Little Red Book That Makes Your Dreams Come True. A clear, definite, common-sense plan of accomplishment

The Book of John LESSON FOUR. John 2. Day 1 John 2:1-5 Day 2 John 2:6-11 Day 3 John 2:12-17 Day 4 John 2:18-22 Day 5 John 2:23-25

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION. No. 116,499 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, CLETE ADAM HARGIS, Appellant.

DISCIPLINARY HEARING COMMISSION OF THE 13 DHC 11

CALLED TO PREACH. WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW AND UNDERSTAND God s call to Ananias and Saul, Ananias questioning reaction, and God s firm response.

Leadership Self Assessment Week Two Essay

Eckhart Tolle - a message for gay people?

Final Paper. May 13, 2015

Transcription:

Mock Trial Objections The basics of every objection allowed in the Mock Trial universe.

Questions calling for a Narrative answer/narrating Questions that are vague and allow for a long, drawn out answer are inappropriate Ex.) Attorney: Tell us what you know about the case. When objecting, the attorney should stand and say Objection. This question calls for a narrative answer. or Objection. The witness is narrating.

Relevance Relevant evidence is evidence presented that tends to prove or disprove any fact related to the case. Ex.) Attorney: What did you have for breakfast? When objecting, the attorney should stand and say Objection. This question is irrelevant.

Character of the Witness Character evidence is evidence that concerns some trait about the witness other than honesty or truthfulness. Ex.) Attorney (crossing a lay witness): Miss, can you please explain to the court why you received a speeding ticket 5 months ago? When objecting, the attorney should stand and say Objection. This question calls for improper character evidence.

Lack of Personal/Professional Knowledge Questions that call for hearsay testimony or a lay witness s opinion are inappropriate as they call for something that the witness has no knowledge of. Ex.) Attorney: Do you think that the driver was drunk at the time of the hit and run? When objecting, the attorney should stand and say Objection. The witness does not have the personal knowledge to answer this question.

Leading Questions Only allowed during cross-examination and when laying foundation, leading questions are questions that suggest the answer. Attorney: The money was under the hay bale, correct? When objecting, the attorney should stand and say Objection. Counsel is leading the witness.

Beyond the Scope Questions that cover information outside of what the crossing attorney/re-directing attorney brought up in questioning are considered beyond the scope. When objecting, the attorney should stand and say Objection. Counsel is asking a question which is beyond the scope of my cross/re-direct examination.

Hearsay Perhaps the most common objection, Hearsay is an out of court statement being offered in court to prove the truth of the matter asserted. Ex.) Attorney: Now Ms. Smith, you say that you heard your neighbor say that he was going to kill his wife? When objecting, the attorney should stand and say Objection. This question calls for hearsay. or Objection. The witness s answer is based on hearsay. When objecting to hearsay, be ready for a fight as there are a plethora of ways to get around a hearsay objection.

Argumentative Argumentative questioning is when the opposing attorney questions the witness roughly or in a harsh tone. Ex.) Attorney: You killed your wife!! When objecting, the attorney should stand and say Objection. Counsel is being argumentative.

Badgering Similar to argumentative questioning, badgering the witness is when the opposing attorney asks the same question several times in order to harass the witness, usually done in a harsh manner. When objecting, the attorney should stand and say Objection. Counsel is badgering the witness.

Asked and Answered Asked and answered is when a question that has already been asked and answered is being asked again. Most often, attorneys do this when they don t get the answer they wanted. When objecting, the attorney should stand and say Objection. This question has already been asked and answered.

Assumes Facts Not in Evidence Questions that assume facts not in evidence jump straight to the point without showing how they got there. In other words, they ask about facts that have not been shown to exist. Ex.) Attorney (without proving there was a pie in the first place): You stole the pie, didn t you? When objecting, the attorney should stand and say Objection. This question assumes facts not in evidence.

Lack of Foundation Lack of foundation is an objection that arises when an attorney begins to question a witness about a certain subject without first proving that (s)he is qualified to answer questions about said subject. Ex.) Attorney: Can you tell the court a little about how the bomb was built? When objecting, the attorney should stand and say Objection. Counsel has not laid the appropriate foundation. NOTE: The opposing party may ask for you to explain how the appropriate foundation has not been laid.

Speculation Closely tied to Lack of Personal Knowledge, speculative questions ask a witness to testify to the motives, intentions, or reasons behind the actions of another without knowledge of said motives, intentions, or reasons. Ex.) Attorney: Why do you think he did it? When objecting, the attorney should stand and say Objection. This question calls for speculation.

Unresponsive The attorney directing or crossing a witness may object if the witness does not directly respond to the questions put to him/her. Witnesses may also be unresponsive if their testimony goes beyond what is asked. When objecting, the attorney (who should already be standing) should say Objection. The witness is being/has become unresponsive.

Unfair Extrapolation Unfair extrapolation is when a witness includes testimony that was not originally included in the case materials and this testimony can potentially affect the trial s outcome. When objecting, the attorney should stand and say Objection. The witness is unfairly extrapolating. or Objection. The witness s testimony is going beyond the information provided in the case materials. NOTE: This objection should only be made if the extra information has a profound impact on the trial.

Something to remember with objections in Mock Trial Most of the time in Mock Trial, attorney will say Objection followed by just the objection. They then offer a brief explanation. Ex.) Objection, assumes facts not in evidence. There is no evidence that my client knew this Mrs. Smith that opposing counsel is referring to.

Read the following excerpt from the affidavit of Rankin Bass carefully, then decide on the appropriate objections for the upcoming scenarios. On one occasion, I overheard a man who was selling homemade pastries at the market telling his wife that the reason no one was purchasing their goods was because the Spree Party made them outcasts. He said that he thought the Spree had spies coming to the Knave Party organization meeting that reported who was in attendance. He felt that it was not just a coincidence that his business declined shortly after he started going to the meetings. In my opinion, his pastries were not very good. Maybe that had something to do with his lack of customers.

Directing Attorney: Rankin, how did you know this pastry salesman s political affiliation? Rankin: Well apart from hearing him say he was a Knave, he had a sign saying I Hate Oprah Xram! (the ruler at the time), who was a Spree, and after someone walked by and claimed they were a Spree, he threw a pastry at them. Crossing Attorney: Objection. Unfair extrapolation. ANSWER

Crossing Attorney: Now, Miss Bass, what color were these pastries? Directing Attorney: Objection. Relevance. ANSWER

Crossing Attorney: You said this man was selling homemade pastries? Rankin: Yes. Crossing Attorney: He sold pastries? Rankin: Yes, home-made. Crossing Attorney: So, he was a pastry salesman? Directing Attorney: Objection. Asked and answered. ANSWER

Crossing Attorney: Do you think this pastry salesman was a Unabomber? Directing Attorney: Objection. Speculation. ANSWER

Crossing Attorney: How can you say his pastries were not good!? Are you familiar with the Freedonian customs and food choices? Directing Attorney: Objection. Argumentative. ANSWER

Crossing Attorney: Miss Bass, what was this pastry salesman s financial situation? Directing Attorney: Objection. Lack of Personal Knowledge. ANSWER

Directing Attorney: Miss Bass, let s go back a little to something we forgot to talk about my first time around questioning you Crossing Attorney: Objection. Beyond ANSWER the scope.

Rankin: Well, let me start from the beginning (talks for 1 minute) Crossing Attorney: Objection. Narrative. ANSWER

Crossing Attorney: Miss Bass, do you have a criminal record? Rankin: No. Crossing Attorney: But I have here that you ve been busted for speeding, and it looks like you received a ticket. Directing Attorney: Objection. This question calls for improper character evidence. ANSWER

Crossing Attorney: Miss Bass, this pastry salesman allegedly attended Knave meetings? Rankin: Of course he sold pastries. Crossing Attorney: But he did attend Knave meetings? Rankin: Well, yes and no. I heard him say something, but I can t really tell for sure. Crossing Attorney: So is that a yes or a no? Rankin: Well Crossing Attorney: Objection. Unresponsive. ANSWER (Usually the attorney does not say objection for this.)

Directing Attorney: And what, if anything, did this salesman say? Crossing Attorney: Objection. Hearsay. ANSWER

Crossing Attorney: Miss Bass, what hand did you hold the gun in? Directing Attorney: Objection! Assumes facts not in evidence. ANSWER

Directing Attorney (1 st Question): Miss Bass, will you please tell the court about the incident concerning the pastry salesman. Crossing Attorney: Objection. Lack of foundation. ANSWER

Crossing Attorney: You heard this pastry salesman say business had gone down? Rankin: Yes. Crossing Attorney: You re telling me that you heard him say his business had gone down? Rankin: Yes. Crossing Attorney: How can you be sure of this? Were you part of his business? Directing Attorney: Objection. Badgering. ANSWER

Directing Attorney: Rankin, you said the pastries tasted bad, right? Crossing Attorney: Objection. Leading. ANSWER

One final note Keep in mind that the vast majority of objections in the Mock Trial universe will not be even close to this easy or clear cut. Most objections can be overlapped. Other things may seem objectionable when in actuality they are not. Keep practicing the objections and hopefully you will have them mastered by the time the competition comes around.