So the lawyer is permitted to lead the witness to get to the point. Why? Because everyone knows that the lawyer has a point she wishes to make to the court with a particular witness AND that the other side’s witness, if given a chance, is not going to cooperate.
However, leading questions are permitted during cross examination. The rules of evidence and court procedure do not generally permit a lawyer to ask leading questions during direct examination. A leading question is one which strongly suggests the desired answer, as when Perry Mason asks, “So it was YOU who gave the fatal injection to your mother, wasn’t it?” whereupon the witness immediately caves and confesses. One crucial difference has to do with leading questions. Because direct and cross examination have different goals, and because a lawyer generally has time to work with her own witnesses in advance of trial, the rules for conducting direct and cross examination are different. Cross examination is the process a lawyer uses to try to discredit the other side’s witnesses. Direct examination is when a lawyer questions witnesses she herself has called to the stand, in an attempt to build a case for her client. If a lawyer asks the court to rule that a witness is hostile, then the lawyer is conducting direct examination, not cross examination. And people say the law has no common sense! Actually, if a lawyer is asking the court to rule that someone is a “hostile witness,” it means the lawyer is probably in trouble. It means the witness is hostile to the lawyer or the lawyer’s client.
#PERMISSION TO TREAT THE WITNESS AS HOSTILE TV#
Dear Straight Dope: We’ve all seen this in TV court dramas - a lawyer asks permission to treat someone being cross-examined as a “hostile witness.” What does this mean, and how does it affect courtroom procedure? nschlott
0 kommentar(er)
