Professor Charles H. Rose III cross examines a witness

Professor Charles H. Rose III demonstrates multiple cross examination
techniques in the case of State v. Alexander.

[@dirtypimpbird]

Lawyer fails to make witness say Yes when he is saying um hum…Um hum does not = yes

[@gn7535]

Any source for that? I don't remember any case where "Uh-huh" didn't mean yes.

[@micahcarter8852]

I'm pretty sure a jury member knows what um hum means. It is common knowledge that um hum = yes.

[@vidyutdevam9204]

well done bird, mm- hmm equates to a yes is a very reasonable assumption. But still per law it's not explicitly mentioned that its a yes .

[@MrLinzee]

Very practical.

[@evanpenny348]

Impossible to tell where counsel is going with this. That's a problem for the witness, but also for the jury. Seems to me like a very circuitous fishing expedition. Beyond this the obvious problem for any witness is that direct questions put words in the witness's mouth. Defense counsel need to instruct witnesses always to think before answering any question, and always answer questions in their own words. A common trick to try to circumvent this type of response is for counsel to end their question with " .... yes or no". A witness can respond with "if I answer yes (or no) to that question I would have to qualify my answer, or "I do not (or I cannot) agree with your characterization of the situation", and DO NOT offer an explanation of why not.

[@DontNeedToKnow84]

So, the point of this was to show that the guy being questioned was the one who made the phone call to the guy who died? At minimum, it showed that the guy being questioned wasn't a credible source of information (given that he had said his brother made the call when his brother was, in fact, in prison), correct?

[@moonlitdevil_princess6827]

Busted that guy...like a BOSS!

[@bondoly66]

the other side would have stopped most of those answers pretty easily.

[@andrewbarchenger2010]

Some judges will not allow any commentary after a witness answers. "So that's your answer." A lot of it is inappropriate but also asked and answered applies. And yes, "Mmhm" is not an answer. Ask the judge to instruct the witness to please answer yes or no for the record. If they don't stop doing it then strike as non-responsive.

[@Harlem55]

That depends upon which court youre in. Federal judges strongly disfavor motions to strike the record where there was no discernable extrenious information in the content holding that non-responsive is confined to at least some degree of extreneous information not germane to the question. Even then, it pays not to object on these sorts of grounds because opposing counsel will just ask on either cross or redirect as the case may be. The exception: when youre trying to create apellate issues the defense can use where an unsavvy prisecutor would make a rather large mistake. In California v. McMartin defense simply allowed the extreneous information and did double impeachment of the states witnesses. Rather Impeach where you can, always be able to impeach your own witness, but stay away from objection to things that really contribute nothing other than wasting time.

[@acesetsthepacesmith7130]

where is your brother now? Ans: He's taking a dump in a restroom!

[@nehaoberoi5219]

GREAT..

[@richardherbert8782]

So.. you know.. obviously this is great, but it's very easy when you have this much to work with lol

[@michaelchavez3995]

Gottem!

[@gabrielan.anderson1299]

Could this long process have been reduced to: "Who was at your place?" "My brother." "Could he have made that call (to the guy you hate, yes or no?" "Yes." "Did you know your brother has been in prison for years, so he wasn't with you?" ("Doctor, does this guy mentally identifies himself with his own brother...why isn't he in some hospital instead of in the street gun-in-hand?")

[@thatboyUPS]

But he's a lawyer, he's crafting a story. He did this extremely well. You can't just ask the important questions, a trial case is all about crafting a story for the jury. Stories win cases.

[@mcpencil524]

this is racist

[@kurer98]

How is this racist?

[@mcpencil524]

i was joking

[@monicaturner02]

mcpencil hahahahaha

[@mcpencil524]

Monica B ha

[@volodyanarchist]

I thought it was strange that they picked a black guy to be a "bad" person, but i like to give benefit of the doubt to people. Perhaps it was just the best actor they could find. One instance is not enough to show the pattern... I wish prosecutors would know that.

[@austinhooper419]

So this guy is a teacher? lol He has very little control over the witness, and is not very fluent in his questions. Would easily lose the jury's attention.

[@gracemaina6593]

What would you recommend