The following are the list of objections that will be permitted for all Regional Competitions.

I. LEADING THE WITNESS II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. Defined: Asking a question on Direct Examination that suggests the particular answer or contains the information the examiner is looking to have confirmed. Objectionable on: DIRECT EXAMINATION only Defined: Asking a question where the introductory part of the question assumes a fact that is not in evidence or the existence of which is in dispute. Objectionable on: DIRECT EXAMINATION and CROSS EXAMINATION Defined: A question that has been asked of a witness once and then is asked again, even if rephrased. Objectionable on: DIRECT EXAMINATION and CROSS EXAMINATION Defined: When more than one question is combined in what seems to be a single question asked of a witness. Objectionable on: DIRECT EXAMINATION and CROSS EXAMINATION Defined: Asking a question of a witness where the witness has no personal knowledge or would have to guess to answer the question. Objectionable on: DIRECT EXAMINATION and CROSS EXAMINATION Defined: Asking a question which is not pertinent or applicable to the issue before the court or to conveying the attorneys theory of the case. Objectionable on: DIRECTI EXAMINATION and CROSS EXAMINATION MISSTATING THE LAW RELEVANCE SPECULATION COMPOUND QUESTION ASKED AND ANSWERED ASSUMING FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE

 VIII. IX. X. XI.

Defined: Objectionable when an attorney is quoting the law incorrectly. Objectionable on: OPENING STATEMENTS and CLOSING ARGUMENTS Defined: Objectionable where an attorney has failed to introduce preliminary facts necessary to bring a(n) document/exhibit into evidence. Objectionable: DIRECT EXAMINATION and CLOSING ARGUMENTS Defined: Objectionable where questions are asked which elicit answers outside questions/testimony presented on direct examination. Objectionable: CROSS-EXAMINATION only Defined: Where the attorney is asking the witness questions in a hostile manner, harassing the witness, or cutting the witness off before he/she answers. Objectionable: CROSS EXAMINATION only Defined: Where the witness speaks endlessly on a non-complex question. Objectionable: DIRECT EXAMINATION only

NO FOUNDATION

BEYOND THE SCOPE

BADGERING THE WITNESS

NARRATIVE

IMPEACHING THE WITNESS

When a witness makes a statement in trial that is inconsistent with his or her deposition testimony, you must first highlight the question that was answered differently at trial. You will want to make sure that the trial testimony being impeached is a direct inconsistent statement with the deposition given before trial.

Once you have highlighted the statement, you can proceed with the following line of questioning: Example

1. Mr. Durham, do you remember having had your deposition taken on February 19, 2012? 2. Do you remember that a court reporter was present at your deposition? 3. Do you remember having been sworn in to tell the truth? 4. Did you tell the truth on that date?
This line of questioning sets the foundation. You are establishing that the witness was deposed the foundation for the impeachment, then you hit the home run by drawing attention to the inconsistency.

previously under oath and that his/her previous testimony was accurate and truthful. After you have set

"Do you remember having been asked the following question ___________ and giving the following answer_______."
cannot refute.

Using the deposition transcript is an awesome tool because its transcript of testimony that the witness

What you have done now is drawn the jurys attention to the fact that the witness has given inconsistent testimony. By asking the previous series of questions you are setting up the witness to contradict himself/herself in way that is easily understood by the jury.

ENTERING DOCUMENTS INTO EVIDENCE

Identification of the Exhibit: The documents/exhibits authenticity can be established through
the testimony of a witness who is able to identify the object in question. Your witness must able to identify the object in court as that same object from the past. testify that he/she is familiar with the object from a previous encounter, and also that he/she is

Example:
Attorney MUST lay foundation for the exhibit/document PRIOR to attempting to enter said

exhibit/document into evidence.

Step 1: Your Honor, I am marking this (letter, document, item) for identification as (Peoples Exhibit A, Defense Exhibit 1, etc.). Ask may you approach opposing counsel. --- Judge will grant. Step 2: Attorney shows the item to opposing counsel. Step 3: The Judge will ask if opposing counsel has any objections, at which time it is opposing
counsels option to object or not object to the evidence being used at trial. After objections have taken place, ask the judge if you may approach the witness.

Step 4: Attorney shows the item to the witness and says, Do you recognize this item marked as
Peoples Exhibit A Witness responds by saying Yes or No.

Step 5: If witness answers Yes, Attorney asks Can you please identify this item for the court and
the witness gives the appropriate identification of the item.

Step 6: Attorney may now ask the witness questions about the document. Step 7: If the attorney wishes the court to consider the document itself as part of their evidence,
then the attorney must move the document or item into evidence. This is accomplished by the admit it. Attorney saying Your Honor I am moving this document/item into evidence, and ask that the Court