Cross Examination: Questioning Technique - How to Build to a Conclusion.

In this video Sonia discusses an effective technique for undermining the evidence of the witness - 'building to a conclusion'.

There will be 2 demonstrations of cross examination during the video. The
witness is played by an actress - Samantha Hopkins.

At 1 minute 29 seconds Sonia demonstrates why building to a conclusion is important. At 3 minutes and 2 seconds, you will find written steps to building to a conclusion. Sonia demonstrates the technique at 7 minutes 31 seconds.

Please note that every Advocate has their own style of XX, you should develop your own style, grounded in solid technique.

NOTE RE. REFERRING A WITNESS TO ANOTHER WITNESS' EVIDENCE

What follows applies to non-defendant witnesses.

Quite often advocates will want to expose inconsistencies between the accounts of witnesses to demonstrate that their opponent's case is inconsistent or unreliable or that a particular witness is not credible.

However, it is not appropriate for an advocate to quote a witness yet to be called to give evidence, or to quote from a witness who has already given evidence, in the course of cross examining another witness. For example, the following is NOT permissible:

Q. Mrs Ghent, Mr Blake says in his witness statement that you had been drinking alcohol.
A. No, that’s not true at all.

Where witnesses provide inconsistent accounts, it is appropriate to draw the tribunal's attention to the inconsistencies between witnesses. But the correct way to do this is to put the substance of the witness' evidence without attributing the source. The advocate can put the substance of what another witness has said in court, or will say in court, WITHOUT attributing the source of the evidence. For example:

Q. Mrs Ghent, you've told the court that you had been celebrating your birthday at the Red Lion pub?
A. Yes.
Q. You arrived at the pub at 6pm?
A. Yes.
Q. And you left at 11.30pm
A. Yes
Q. So you spent 5 and a half hours in the pub?
A. Yes
Q. So presumably you had been drinking alcohol whilst in the pub?
A. No, I wasn’t drinking at all.

In the above example the substance of what Mr Blake will say has been put to the witness, without quoting directly from him. When Mr Blake gives evidence in court, no doubt he will confirm that Mrs Ghent had been drinking. The cross-examining advocate will have clearly highlighted the inconsistency between the two prosecution witnesses.

When cross examining a defendant, remember that he/she will give evidence after the prosecution has closed its case (if he/she decides to give evidence). The defendant will also have seen and heard each of the prosecution witnesses give their evidence in court. It would be perfectly permissible therefore, when cross examining the defendant, to quote directly from any of the prosecution witnesses and to attribute the source of the quote. See below, for an example:

Q. Miss Hill, you've heard the evidence of Mrs Williams, she told the court that her necklace was found in your handbag.
A. She's lying.

Thank you for watching! Please hit the 'like' button and consider subscribing if you like my channel. I post new videos every 2 weeks! Please see below for more resources:

GET MY FREEBIE HERE:
Case analysis toolkit - https://www.advocacytutor.com/case-an...

SHOP MY ONLINE COURSE:
How to Cross-Examine Effectively and Strategically - https://www.advocacytutor.com/course-...

VISIT MY WEBSITE:
The Advocacy Tutor - https://www.advocacytutor.com/