Cross-examination Techniques #4 - What to do with the impeachment

So you confronted the witness. What happens next?

In the previous episode, we presented the basic technique for impeachment. There remain two subjects to discuss before we leave impeachment. The first is what to do after, and the second is when to choose to impeach.

As with all cross-examination strategies, you always have the choice to do or not to do (sorry, Yoda). After the impeachment – when you have rubbed the witness's nose in the contradiction – your choice is simple but not easy. Do you pursue the contradiction or save your ammunition until your final argument?

Remember the primary reasons why you crossed this witness at all. You could have passed up the opportunity.

·        To help your case.

·        To hurt their case.

·        To help the credibility of one of your witnesses.

·        To hurt the credibility of this or another of their witnesses.

Let's assume that your impeachment showed that the earlier statement was (possibly) more accurate than the one the witness just tried to sell. Decide which of the four goals this difference advances.

·        You may want to ask more questions about the substance of the earlier statement. The purpose is to drive home how much it helps your case or hurts theirs.

·        You may want to ask more questions about the accuracy of the earlier statement. The purpose is to drive home how much more likely it is than the recent version.

Your default position should be not to ask any questions about the contradiction. Hammer home the significant discrepancy during the argument. Accept the win. What should move you off your default position and into 'Go' mode? The only reason should be that you can better advance one of your four goals than stay silent on the issue.

This episode’s attachments include an extensive demo of the cross-examination of May Donoghue. It demonstrates several techniques while accomplishing the goal of showing the exploitation of the impeachment.