CROSS examination/IMPEACHMENT - A Guide to Impeachment by Prior Inconsistent Statement
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 17 сен 2011
- Professor Wes Porter discusses how to impeach a witness with their prior inconsistent statement.
Professor Wes Porter served as a trial attorney with the Department of Justice's Criminal Division, Fraud Section, in Washington D.C., the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Hawaii and the JAG Corps for the U.S. Navy stationed in the Trial Service Office Pacific. After lecturing, coaching mock trial and teaching as an adjunct professor for years, he moved to academia full-time teaching courses in Evidence, Criminal Law and Procedure, and skills courses like Trial Advocacy. Professor Porter earned tenure, became a full professor of law, and led a center devoted to litigation and trial skills training.
Professor Porter still teaches in law schools and trains lawyers new to the profession but he also presides over trials as a judge. To contact Professor Porter with questions, you may email him at wesreberporter@gmail.com. Aloha, WRP (c) Copyright Wes R. Porter 2020. All rights reserved.
You may request permission to link to these videos in your materials at wesreberporter@gmail.com.
As a 3L law student, this is fantastic, esp for my trial advocacy class. Thank you Prof. Porter.
3C's in Cross Examination- Commit(deposition), Credit (consistent) , & Confront ( closing argument).
Nope. All during the cross after you have the proper foundation of an inconsistent statement.
In closing, you remind jurors of the impeachment during the cross to support a credibility argument.
Wes- You'd be incredibly proud of Curtis L. Briggs doing a bang up job with this technique during cross of today's witness in the #shrimpboy trial. The cooperating witnesses' testimony almost always sounds bad during direct. And then the jury gets to see all the different versions of the story they gave to the FBI prior to their testimony. Watching them Commit is fun! I'm sending this to our interns tonight. GGU represent. #freeshrimpboy
Depends on your state and the rule. But in California you play the statement or read the statement. You can read it yourself and force the witness to read it. The statement is published to the jury. Te statement can be under oath or not. The rules simply require the witness have the opportunity to explain the inconsistent statement after it is presented.
Subscribed, Thank you so much.
i can never find any good advice - in a book or online - about the issues i always have at trial, like how to impeach with a prior inconsistent statement when the statement exists as a 2 second snip on a 3 hour long audio recording on a CD ? do i just play it on my laptop and hand it to the witness to listen to on earphones so it's outside the hearing of the jury? even the best evidence and trial manuals don't address this. it's all geared to the old days when everything was on paper.
I had a prosecutor and a judge tell me that this method is required if you are going to be impeaching a witness with the prior inconsistent statement. They said the fact that I was not using it meant that I could not cross-examine the witness. Are there any cases or rules on that?
Yes, it’s a specific process, based in the rules, that if done correctly, works very well in front of the jury. If the cross examining attorney deviates from the specific process, then it can fall flat or get shut down by the witness or judge.
is impeaching a witness allowed?
Duh..that's why your attorney challenges the witness by asking him leading questions
What kind of question is that?
The person might have meant is impeaching your own witness allowed. @@coimbralaw