Cross Examination Made Simple Part II: Impeachment by Inconsistent Statement (& Omission)

In this presentation, I cover preparation for cross-examination; the three steps for impeachment that are tried and true; pitfalls to avoid; a flexible technique for cross-examination that can be used with virtually any adverse witness; impeachment by omission; and how to expose the liar, the cheat, and the fool. Finally, I walk you through hypotheticals that demonstrate how to apply these rules practically in the courtroom.
Duration: 1 Day
Hours: 4 Hours
Training: Live Training
Training Level: All Level
Batch Two
Tuesday April 08 2025
12:00 PM - 04:00 PM (Eastern Time)
Batch Three
Monday May 05 2025
12:00 PM - 04:00 PM (Eastern Time)
Batch Four
Monday June 09 2025
12:00 PM - 04:00 PM (Eastern Time)
Batch Five
Monday July 07 2025
12:00 PM - 04:00 PM (Eastern Time)
Live Session
Single Attendee
$149.00 $249.00
Live Session
Recorded
Single Attendee
$199.00 $332.00
6 month Access for Recorded
Live+Recorded
Single Attendee
$249.00 $416.00
6 month Access for Recorded

Overview: 

In this presentation, we focus on effective strategies for preparing and executing cross-examination in the courtroom. You’ll learn the three essential steps for impeachment, common pitfalls to avoid, and a versatile cross-examination technique that works with nearly any adverse witness. We’ll explore impeachment by omission and provide insights on how to expose liars, cheats, and fools on the stand. To wrap up, I will guide you through practical hypotheticals, demonstrating how to apply these techniques effectively in real courtroom scenarios. This session aims to enhance your ability to challenge and dismantle opposing testimony with precision and confidence.

Course Objective:

This course explores effective strategies for cross-examination, focusing on the role of "paper" in preparation, the impeachment process, and how to undermine a witness's credibility through inconsistent statements. It covers the three steps of impeachment, how to present prior statements for maximum impact, and the use of omission as a tool for impeachment. 

The course also addresses common pitfalls to avoid, the emotional core of the lawyer during questioning, and balancing aggressive questioning with maintaining jury credibility. Additionally, it highlights the importance of understanding human nature, jury engagement, and preparation for redirect examination. 

Target Audience: 

  • Trial attorneys (criminal & Civil)
  • ADR
  • Negotiations
  • Arbitration

Basic Knowledge:

Trial Skills (beginner, intermediate, advanced)

Curriculum
Total Duration: 4 Hours
How does the concept of "paper" play a crucial role in the preparation for cross-examination?
In what ways can the credibility of a witness be undermined through impeachment by inconsistent statements?
Can you explain the three steps involved in the impeachment process during cross-examination and their significance?
What strategies can a lawyer employ to ensure that the jury perceives the earlier statement as more credible than the current testimony?
How does the use of a witness's prior statement influence the effectiveness of cross-examination?
What are the potential pitfalls a lawyer should avoid when conducting a cross-examination that involves impeachment by inconsistent statements?
How does the emotional core of a lawyer influence their approach to cross-examination, particularly when dealing with witnesses?
In what ways can the omission of a statement by a witness be used as a tool for impeachment, and what are the conditions for its effectiveness?
How does the format and presentation of questions impact the witness's responses during cross-examination?
What role does the understanding of human nature and motivation play in effectively conducting cross-examinations?
How can a lawyer balance the need for aggressive questioning with the importance of maintaining credibility with the jury?
What are the implications of allowing a witness to explain inconsistencies during cross-examination?
In what situations might it be more beneficial for a lawyer to read the impeaching statement rather than allowing the witness to read it themselves?
How can a lawyer prepare for the possibility of redirect examination after conducting a cross-examination?
What techniques can be employed to engage the jury actively during cross-examination, and why is this important?