• Renewal Retreat

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • © The Regents of the University of California, 2010-2017. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited.

(Almost) Never Ask Why

One of the time-honored rules of cross-examination of a witness is “never ask why.” Asking “why” or “how can you say that” or “please explain” gives a witness the chance to launch into a poignant, self-righteous, or injured monologue. But sometimes you should break that rule.

The goal of cross-examination is to control what information the jury gets from the witness. If the witness is controlled, the jury will hear the points the cross-examiner wants to make. Without that control, the witness will present his own version of events to the jury.

The “why” question gives the witness a chance to make a speech during examination, which is exactly what you don’t want to happen.

But there are times you shouldn’t honor the “no why” rule, such as when

  • The witness needs a bit of room to show his or her unpleasant side. When you know that the witness’ explanation will be unconvincing, and possibly even irritating to the jury. You may have learned from deposition that this particular witness has a singularly unimpressive answer to the question “why?” Many witnesses are glib and convincing for a short time on the stand, but wear out their welcome as they spend more time talking to the jury.
  • There’s no downside. Some “why” questions are without risk, because there is no plausible explanation. In general, if a witness has been backed into a corner so that the question “was that fair?” cannot be answered, you’ll be safe in asking “why?”
  • The answer is known and helpful. If you know that the answer helps your case (because the question has been asked earlier during deposition, or there is a signed statement or grand jury transcript as a back up), ask a “why” question. This, incidentally, provides a good reason to ask “why” questions often during depositions.

Asking “why” at the right time can be a valuable weapon in the arsenal of a confident examiner, but do it sparingly.

For more “rules” of cross-examination and when to break them, check out CEB’s Effective Direct and Cross-Examination Book, chap 4. CEB also has an excellent program that covers getting your own witness ready to handle cross-examination, Preparing Witnesses for Deposition and Trial, available On Demand.

© The Regents of the University of California, 2012. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited.

7 Responses

  1. I always questioned my law professors on this one because I couldn’t see why they couldn’t see a benefit at times. Great blog, Julie!

  2. The real problem with a why question is that it does not solicit facts from a fact witness. It solicits opinion. Opinion cannot be objectively impeached by other fact witnesses.

  3. As a testifying expert, I often look forward to those “why” questions as a means to explain my findings/opinions in greater detail.

Add your comment to the blog post

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: