24-25 Trial Advocacy Lecture Notes

TRIAL
LAW DEVELOPMENT CENTER

DEPARTMENT OF POST
ADVOCA GRADUATE LEGAL STUDIES &
LEGAL AID TRAINING
CY LECTURE Trial Advocacy Team

BAR COURSE ACADEMIC YEAR
2024/2025
NOTES
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The trial Advocacy team would like to acknowledge Ms. Alinda Linda
Ikanza for putting this work together that the team now uses to skill
students at the Law Development Centre.
FOREWARD
Dear Students,
Trial Advocacy being a performance skill, the best way to learn is to practice the various skills set.
Therefore, these notes are not intended to replace your practical training. Neither can they be as
exhaustive or authoritative as the various trial advocacy textbooks and reading resources availed
to you. They are merely meant to introduce you to the basic advocacy skills which shall be
covered in our classes and to in some cases cover the unique aspects of practice applicable to
our Uganda jurisdiction.
The principles of advocacy and persuasion are universal and common across diverse jurisdictions.
You are therefore encouraged, if not required, to study all other materials availed in order to
master the principles the of advocacy as the skill’s foundation is knowledge of substantive and
procedural law.
May you grow as you go through the Bar Course.

Table of Contents
Case Analysis ............................................................................................................ 1
Examination in Chief ............................................................................................... 7
Documentary Exhibits ............................................................................................ 21
Cross Examination and Impeachment ................................................................... 28
Trial Objections ....................................................................................................... 35
Final Submissions ................................................................................................... 38

TRIAL ADVOCACY SKILLS TRAINING AY 2024/2025
CASE ANALYSIS AND TRIAL STRATEGY
Introduction
Advocates must be story tellers. Because trials are contests where the best story teller wins1.
However, advocates do not tell their stories in vacuums. Unlike other story tellers, the context of
an Advocate’s story is determined by the legal regime that governs the remedy sought in a case.
This can be defined as the detailed examination of the facts and evidence making up the case to
categorise the strengths, weaknesses and develop a corresponding theory and theme for the case.
The story is then designed or arranged to fulfil the elements of a particular cause of action. Every
remedy sought from Court will be based on a certain set of legal principles that give a party the
right or entitlement to the remedy thought. This is also known as a cause of action in Civil
Claims or an Offence in Criminal proceedings. Theories are developed based on the legal
principles which cover a particular set of facts. And once the Theory is developed, it needs a
theme/hook to sell it. First we shall define both Theory and Theme and then we shall discuss a
trial strategies and how they aid in fulfilling the theory and theme of a case.
A lawyer’s initial preparation involves considering and deciding which cause of action their
claim will be founded on. If they are in a criminal trial, they will have to determine the offences
disclosed by the facts. These causes of action will have elements founded by common law
principles, case law or statutes which must be fulfilled or rebutted in order for a particular
element to be obtained. For example, when once gets injured during an accident, their cause of
action could lie in Negligence in a civil claim or reckless driving as a criminal offence. Similarly
the parties on the opposite side would have defences that must also hold up in law.
Once a particular legal principle is identified, then a theory can be developed for both a case or a
defence.
Theory:
There are several ways to define a Theory;
1. Your theory of the case is your version of what really happened and why you should win.
It must be logical, fit the legal requirements of the claims or defenses, but is always
expressed in non-legal terms. When your client is hit from behind in a bar fight and ends
up stabbing two people, self defense is the legal defense. The theory has to express the
dilemma your client faced in compelling, non-legal language. The theory could be that
the accused used a pocket knife to save his life from the kicks and blows of the five
people in a fight at a bar. This theory explains the critical elements to your case — why
your client was afraid, and why a knife in his pocket does not make him a thug. By
Jeffery Robinson in an article titled Opening Statements Become Opening Stories
(with modifications).
2. Your theory is the adaptation of your story to the legal issues in the case. A theory of the
case should be expressed in a single paragraph that combines an account of the facts and
1
Quote by Jeff Tilden, American Trial Lawyer at Kampala, August 2018
1
law in such a way as to lead the trier of fact to conclude that your client must win.
Modern Trial Advocacy by Steven Lubert 4th Edition.
3. ―That combination of facts (beyond dispute) and law which, in a common sense and
emotional way, leads the jury /judge to conclude that a fellow is wrongfully accused (or
should not be severely punished).‖ - Tony Natale [Supervisory Asst. Federal Public
Defender, Federal Public Defender Organization for the Southern District of
Florida, Miami, FL].
4. ―One central theory that organizes all facts, reasons, arguments and furnishes the basic
position from which one determines every action in the trial.‖ Mario Conte
5. ―A paragraph of one to three sentences which summarizes the facts, emotions and legal
basis for the citizen accused’s acquittal or conviction on a lesser charge while telling the
defense’s story of innocence or reduced culpability.‖ Vince Aprile
6. How the facts fit into the Law. Or why your client should win but explained by the facts.
For example, not ―He was negligent‖ but instead ―He didn’t look.‖ Steve Fury.
WHY HAVE A CASE THEORY?

“EVERYTHNG WE DO AT TRIAL WILL BE CONTROLED BY YOUR CASE THEORY”.
Your case theory controls;

• Your discovery & trial preparation
• Choice of Court / Forum to see remedy
• What’s said in your opening statement
• The evidence you lead.
• What is asked on examination in chief and cross examination
• What’s said in your submissions
To develop and express your theory, ask these three questions:
• What happened?
• Why did it happen?
• Why does that mean that my client should win?
If your answer is longer than one paragraph, your theory may be logical and true, but it is
probably too complicated. A successful theory contains these elements:
• It is logical. It is based on a foundation of undisputed or otherwise provable facts, all
of which lead in a single direction.
• It speaks to the legal elements of your case. All of your trial persuasion must aimed at
a "legal" conclusion. Your theory therefore must be directed to prove every legal
element that is necessary to both justify a verdict on your behalf and preserve it on
appeal.
2
• It is simple. A good theory makes maximum use of undisputed facts. It relies as little as
possible on evidence that may be hotly controverted, implausible, inadmissible, or
otherwise difficult to prove.
• It is easy to believe. Even "true" theories may be difficult to believe because they
contradict everyday experience or because they require harsh judgments. An airtight
theory is able to encompass the entirety of the other side's case and still result in your
victory by sheer logical force.
A theory of the case consists of the following parts:

1. The relevant law - The law that applies to the issues which arise in your case.
2. The facts of the crime that are beyond dispute - Those facts which (no matter what you do or
say) will be believed by the fact finder as true. These include those facts which you will be
able to present (through affidavit, direct examination or cross-examination) which the fact
finder would likely accept as true.
3. Common sense - Ordinary people must believe based on their life experiences that the
defense theory of the case is what happened.
4. A Theme - A word, phrase, or simple sentence that captures the controlling or dominant
emotion and/or reality of the theory of the case. These often motivate more decisions by
people than logic. Therefore, a theory of the case should generate feelings in the fact finder
as to what, how, and why the case occurred.
A detailed look at Theme

Some definitions;
1. Best presented in a single sentence, a theme justifies the morality of your theory and
appeals to the justice of the case. It has no independent legal weight, but rather it gives
persuasive force to your legal arguments. Just as your theory must appeal to logic, your
theme must appeal to moral force. Modern Trial Advocacy by Steven Lubert 4 th Edition
2. Theme may also be defined as that part of the ―story‖ presented in court which the lawyer
selects and presents because of its particularly persuasive effect in relation to the ultimate
conclusion which the lawyer wants the tribunal of fact to draw. Opinion Writing and
Case Preparation Manual College of Law.
3. Theory consolidates why you should win. Theme is what sells it. Shawna Geiger
4. In 10 words or less conveying how and the moral basis why a Court should decide in
your client’s favour. Or present it as a News Paper Headline.
5. A one sentence distillation of your case theory.
The most compelling themes appeal to shared values, civic virtues, or common motivations. And
each of these have their opposites that can also be contrasted against them.
• Examples of shared values – Truth, Justice, Peace, Mercy, Public Good/Policy, Unity,
Love, Fairness, Defending the Defenseless, Defence of Property etc
• Examples of common motivations – Family, Friendship, Patriotism, Success,
Achievement, Loyalty, Faithfulness and fidelity, etc
3
• In a case for breach of contract, where the cause of action is specific performance, your
theory will explain why a verdict is compelled by the law. Your theme can be "They
honour money but not their promise." Or you might try, "You can’t sell some property,
and keep it too."
• In a criminal case, where the accused is an unwilling participant, an example can be

unwilling participant - forced to rob or where the accused is an unwilling accomplice -
victim of fear.
• Once you have developed a theory and theme for your case, then you need a Trial
Strategy. (Frame or Plan).
Trial Strategy
From developing the case theory, to making an opening statement, to the objections made, to the
questions put to witnesses during the examination in chief, cross-examination and re-
examination, to the impassioned final submissions attacking the credibility of an adverse witness,
everything an advocate does and says in the courtroom should be planned in advance, hence the
need for a trial strategy.
Once a theory and a theme been developed, then you must come up with a Trial Strategy or Plan
for your case. Both in terms of the evidence you will lead and challenge and the type of legal
process you will utilize to get the best or most favourable remedy quickly and affordably.
Below are the various parts of the case that make up your Trial Strategy which you must
plan;
1. Planning Your Legal Argument / Submission
Ask yourself these two questions: 'What do I want to say at the end of the case? What evidence
must I introduce or elicit in order to be able to say it? The answers will give you the broad
outline of your entire case.
2. Planning the Presentation of Your Case.

The major task of trial preparation is working with the facts; organising the evidence you have,
identifying and locating additional evidence you need, and planning effective ways of presenting
it. Developing the evidence is an integral part of refining your case theory.
a) Consider Your Potential Witnesses and Exhibits

 Evaluate Each Witness Individually
 Factual Weaknesses
 Evidentiary Problems

Credibility Problems
 Evaluate Each Exhibit Individually
 Evidential Problems or Is it admissible.
 Which witness will tender it.
b) Decide Which Witness to Call and their order.
4
Irrespective of the number of witnesses available, one should make a positive choice of whether
to call each individual, and not put every potential witness on the stand as a matter of course.
Determination of the order of calling witnesses will be influenced by practical factors beyond
one’s control, such as the times when particular witnesses are available or the rules of
evidentiary foundations that require calling some witnesses before others. However, within these
practical restrictions, the effective ordering of witnesses will help an advocate to present a
logical, understandable case that highlights its strengths and hides its weaknesses as much as
possible.
Consider the following suggestions;

 plan to start with a strong, important witness who can describe the event;
 start with witnesses who can set the scene, authenticate pictures of it, and describe the
motives of the main actors;
 in general, call witnesses in chronological order, e.g., the plaintiff and eyewitnesses first
to describe the accident, then witnesses to prove damages;
 call corroborating witnesses after a primary witness has testified; call weak or minor
witnesses in the middle of your case;
 if several witnesses are needed to lay a foundation, such as a chain of custody, call them
seriatim;
 call lay witnesses first and expert witnesses near the end, since they are generally
drawing conclusions that will not make sense until the Court understands all the facts;
 finish with a strong witness. This takes advantage of the principle of recency.
3. Planning Your Cross-Examinations
Anticipate in advance evidence that should be objected to, and places where your opponent may
object to your evidence. You need to decide whether the judge / magistrate will sustain any of
these objections and exclude the information.
4. Suit disposal strategy

After an advocate has planned their case theory and trial strategy, they must come up with a
strategy informed by the above two aspects, on how they shall dispose off the case. These
strategies may defer depending on the nature of the case and below we consider both civil and
criminal prosecution and defence strategies.
Example of Civil Case Disposal Plan

Plaintiff (litigation or ADR) Defence
Obtaining maximum compensation / Adduce evidence challenging entire claims,
recovery Counter claim for own losses
Use both above to reduce liability.
Settling at earliest Settling at earliest
Separate claims / joinder of parties and Technical issues with claims, joinder of
claims. parties and claims
5
Example of Criminal Case Disposal Plan
Prosecution Defence

Choice of charges to prefer / persons to  A "complete denial" strategy (discredit
charge. prosecution evidence type)
 Multiple charges / alternative charges.  A "confession" strategy (plead guilty and
 Consider separate trials / joinder of mitigate sentence)
charges / offences / offenders.  An "admit and explain" strategy. Defence

Jurisdictional considerations. that exculpates or reduces culpability. Even
if the accused is guilty, depicting a story in
Credibility and reliability of witnesses. a better light could lead to a plea bargain or
even being found guilty on a lesser
charge.)
Further Reading;
Chapters on Case Analysis in all Advocacy Text Books availed.
6
EXAMINATION IN CHIEF AND WITNESS STATEMENTS
1.0 MODULE 02: EXAMINATION IN CHIEF AND WITNESS STATEMENTS

1.1 Objectives of this Module:
 To understand the meaning of examination in chief;
 Understand the purpose of examination in chief;
 Understand the meaning of Witness Statements;
 To know the relevance of Witness Statements in a trial process; and
 Understand how to use Witness Statements in a trial process.
1.2 Learning Outcomes:

 To explain the meaning of examination in chief;
 To explain the purpose of examination in chief;
 To illustrate the art of conducting a proper examination-in-chief;
 To explain the relevance of Witness statements in a trial process; and
 To demonstrate the use of Witness Statements in a trial process.
1.3 INTRODUCTION:
The ability to examine and oppose the examination of witnesses in open court in
an adversary setting is the most basic skill of the trial lawyer. Yet the most common
criticism made of trial lawyers is their inability to conduct proper, intelligent,
purposeful examinations and to oppose those examinations.
A good lawyer leads his or her witness to turn evidence into fact and fact into truth.
It’s the duty of Counsel representing the prosecution to ensure that he or she
discharges the burden of proving the case beyond a reasonable doubt (criminal
proceedings). Prosecutors must therefore call witnesses in every trial to prove their
Module 03: Examination in Chief and Witness Statements
7
case to the expected standard. This is the same position even in civil proceedings
where the burden of proof is either on the balance of probability or slightly above
the balance of probability but not beyond reasonable doubt. Examination in Chief
is the keystone in the prosecution's arch. It is also important to the defender who
will call witnesses in support of the defensive theory. Direct examination is a vastly
overlooked skill. Unlike cross-examination, there is very little written material to guide
practitioners through the examination of their own witnesses. This is surprising because
cases are actually won or lost on the fruits of direct examination.
Examination in Chief is one of the most subtle and sophisticated form of advocacy.
It is subtle because a good chief examination focuses entirely on the witnesses
and their evidence. The evidence should appear to be flowing effortlessly from the
witness. It should look easy. Whereas the witness should be memorable, the
lawyer should not. Chief examination is sophisticated advocacy because during its
course, counsel is actually presenting their case, while trying to satisfy a multitude
of objectives, such as maximizing the potential of each witness to present all
relevant evidence in as logical, credible, persuasive and accurate manner as
possible, while knitting all witnesses' evidence together in a coherent fashion in
order to prove all the elements of the offence beyond a reasonable doubt.
Examination in Chief thus becomes a starting point for any litigation. In the
adversarial system of our country, it becomes a tool of extracting truth from the
facts.
1.4 Definition of Examination in Chief:

The examination of a witness by a party who calls him shall be called examination
in chief (see Sec. 136 (1) of the Evidence Act). Examination in chief is the first
examination after the witness has been sworn in or affirmed. It is a province of a
party by whom the witness is called to examine him in chief for the purpose of
eliciting from the witness all the material facts within his knowledge which tend to
8
prove the party’s case. Examination in Chief is also known as Direct Examination.
This is where you obtain evidence from your own witnesses. You need to ensure
that your witnesses give clear evidence and that they do not talk too fast in order
that notes can be taken. Ensure the witness faces the Judge or Judicial officer
when answering questions and is not looking at you. This will enhance the quality
of their evidence. When asking your witnesses questions, you need to try to elicit
from them only the evidence that is relevant. Always therefore bear in mind why
you are asking your witness a particular question and what you want to hear from
them.
1.5 Objectives of Examination in Chief:
Examination in chief of a witness is intended to achieve a number of objectives;
1.5.1 Major Objectives

a) To determine admissibility of evidence;
b) To prepare a witness to lead evidence in a trial;
c) Present persuasive and credible evidence; and
d) To prove each and every element of the cause of action, offence and or
defence to the expected standard.
1.5.2 Minor Objectives

In addition, you are also trying to achieve the following slightly less essential, but
still important, objectives:
a) Present a logical, complete and coherent theory of your case;
b) Present each witness in the best possible light;
c) Use the evidence of one witness to support another so that a seamless cloth
may be woven of the proven fact;
d) Fill in gaps in the evidence and attempt to explain any inconsistencies;
9
e) Shut down potential cross-examination thereby limiting the exposure of your
witnesses; and
f) Allow the defence as little room to move as possible by minimizing the
possibilities of a defence supported through cross-examination of witnesses.
1.6 The Directed Approach to Examinations-in-Chief
1.6.1 Effective questioning techniques

– Use of open ended questions.
- The Difference between closed questions and leading questions
1.6.2 Moving from “open questions” to “directed examination”

– planning the direct examination
– breaking down the topics/issues
– effective problem analysis
1.6.3 Understanding the Importance of Preparation
Most witnesses have no prior experience in testifying. As counsel, it’s your job to
ensure that both you and your witnesses are thoroughly prepared. This includes
fully understanding what evidence needs to be elicited from each witness, and
preparing your witnesses so that they can effectively convey this information. In
this session, you will learn:
 What does an unplanned examination-in-chief look like?
 How to elicit the information you need from your witness
1.6.4 Headlines and transitions
 Why are headlines so important;

 Effective use of headlines to create the outline of a good examination;
 Listening, and looping back;
10
 How to be more persuasive;
 Techniques to effectively follow up, clarify and qualify facts; and
 How to keep control of the witness
This session will also include a discussion about practical tips and strategies on
how to make your witness more persuasive.
You’ll engage in hands-on exercises and drills focused on how you should deal
with a witness when they do not provide you with the answer you were hoping for,
and learn strategies for how to manage the following issues:
 The witness who talks too quickly or too softly;
 The rambling witness;
 Dealing with partial or insufficient answers;
 Using notes to help direct questioning;
 Making eye contact, and with whom;
 The importance of pace and strategies for setting the right one;
1.7 Leading Questions
During examination-in-chief the advocate is forbidden from asking their witnesses

leading questions especially on disputed aspects. A leading question is one which
in its phrasing suggests its own answer1. By way of an example, the man wearing
a red and white jumper, wasn’t he? By suggesting the answer to the witness you
reduce the witness' impact. Leading questions are forbidden in examination-in-
chief because the lawyer is not allowed to lead their witness and in effect put words
1
Section 140 of the Evidence Act Cap 6
11
into their mouth. When you call your own witness you hope and expect that they
will provide evidence that is favourable to your case and will 'come up to proof'.
As a general rule when you ask your witness questions you should phrase your
questions using simple words and phrases to ensure the witness fully understands
what you are asking them. When questioning your witnesses consider using points
of reference to add variety to your questioning and to move the witness along from
one episode to the next.
For example, 'What happened to the van after it overtook the truck?'
Generally, a leading question suggests the answer, or assumes the existence of a
disputed fact. You are allowed to ask leading questions about non-disputed
matters. An example of the above question as a leading question would be ―Did
the Van swerve after overtaking the truck?‖ or ―The Van swerved after overtaking
the truck, didn’t it?‖.
1.11 Open and Closed Questions
You can ask your witnesses a variety of open and closed questions. To obtain the
information you require from a witness it will be necessary to use closed questions,
for example, to establish undisputed aspects of the case such as the background
and set the scene and to bring out details or emphasize a particular part of the
story. This more so because some closed questions can be leading in certain
aspects. Open questions are the best in allowing the witness to freely tell their part
of the story or to turn their attention to a subject and then ask the witness to talk
about that subject.
Your questions should be short and concise so when the judge hears the question
and hears an equally short and concise answer, his or her next thought is one of
the ―W’s.‖ Your examination should follow that train of thought.
12
For example, if you ask about a meeting, the listener would usually then start to
ask in his or her mind the following questions:
a) When was the meeting held? (Time)
b) Where was the meeting held? (Place)
c) Why was the meeting called? (Reason)
d) Who was present at the meeting? (People)
e) What was discussed at the meeting? (Occurrences/Activities)
f) How was the meeting conducted? (Procedures or processes)
Ask yourself how an event or incident unfolds by putting yourself in the witness’
shoes. Your own mind would likely then follow this 5W and 1H track. So the
questions in court or in an arbitration should follow the same process of
determining the answer and then framing the question.
Do not leave the witness to do all the talking. Oftentimes when reviewing a
transcript in the Court of Appeal, you will see a short question, followed by a half-
page answer. If you read a transcript like that then, in my respectful opinion, the
direct examination has not been properly carried out. One should never lose
control of a witness, and dictating the pace of the evidence is crucial depending on
the ability of the judge or Judicial officer either to electronically or manually make
notes.
There is no reward for speed. Remembering that judges are mere mortals should
be your guiding perspective. Always keep an eye on the judge or Judicial officer
before going to the next question. When the judge or Judicial officer is required to
look at an exhibit or look at one document in a volume of exhibits, make sure that
the judge is at that exhibit before you begin the question related to it.
13
1.12 A guide to the actual Examination-in-Chief
Trying out witness examination for the first time can be intimidating. You're there
to either make or break the witness, with only your skills, case theory, and wit. As
Walter Sofronoff QC wrote, it is "a species of unarmed combat"; it's raw advocacy
at its most exhilarating. You can spend years learning witness examination
properly, but it's always good to start with some of the fundamentals. Here are
some top guides to set you on your way.
1.12.1 Start with the Basics

These include skills like speaking clearly and slowly, having good posture and eye
contact, and trying to stamp out your 'gremlins' - things you subconsciously say or
do while speaking, like saying 'um', or clicking a pen. Using plain English is
important, as you're communicating with everyday people. Say " ―car‖ and not
―automobile‖ for example, to save everyone from becoming confused or distracted
by your vocabulary.
1.12.2 Be nice to the witnesses

Professor Peter Lyons wrote, "the first aim is to strengthen your client's case by
highlighting the good points through the opponent's witness and by putting facts
that the witness will agree with..." – and they won't agree with you if you're being
nasty!
1.12.3 Align the Evidence with the Case Theory

Put simply, its what you have to prove in order to obtain a certain remedy. The
should be the facts arranged to fulfil the requirements of the law. They should be
made of your strongest points that directly address the key elements of the relevant
law. Use this to guide your questioning. You have to ask your witness questions in
a way that enables them to tell their story to the court.
14
A good examination plays out like a story. When examining your witness, you want
people to be totally focused on your witness. Try and ask short, simple questions
that allow your witness to tell a story - who, what, when, where, and why. Ask about
events in chronological order.
1.12.4 Control the witness's story telling

While the focus isn't on you, you need to remain in control, so the witness is
directed to cover only the evidence required to speak to the core legal principles
at the heart of a dispute. You can interrupt the witness where it's appropriate to do
so.
1.13 Checklist for an Effective Examination-in-chief or Preparing your

Examination-in-Chief
1) Know the theory of your case
a) What are the major issues in the case? (start with your pleadings)
b) What is the theory of your case?
c) What evidence do you require to support the theory of your case?
d) Can some of the evidence be obtained through a Request to Admit?
e) What evidence do you need to rebut your opponent’s theory?
f) What do you want to say in your closing submissions?
g) How will the evidence of each of your witnesses add to your closing
submissions?
2) Consider the purpose for which you are calling the witness
a) Can this witness testify to facts that assist you in advancing your case?
b) Are there exhibits that must be introduced through this witness?
c) Is there another witness you are already calling that can testify to the same
facts/identify the same exhibits?
d) Can this witness bolster or detract from the credibility of others that will
testify?
15
3) Prepare your witness
a) Before trial, meet with your witness. Review any prior testimony and any
documents you intend to introduce through the witness.
b) Discuss with your witness how the process in court will unfold. Describe to
the witness who she can expect to see in court – i.e. Judge, Court Clerk,
opposing counsel, Court orderly, others.
c) Do not ask the witness to memorize evidence.
d) Do not coach the witness or offer answers to the witness during preparation.
4) Create an outline for your examination

a) What do you need your witness to say?
b) What questions do you need to ask to elicit the necessary information?
c) Consider the order and organisation in which you intend to ask the question
(chronologically; thematically). A good examination should be organized in
chapters guided by the various issues or elements to prove.
d) Consider questions that may be posed in cross-examination which you can
diffuse during examination-in-chief.
1.14 Conducting your Examination-in-Chief

1. Form of your Examination – telling a persuasive story
a) Cover the preliminaries first, non-contentious areas. For example, the
background information on the witness’ profession, job, position etc.
b) Do not ask leading questions on contentious and/or significant issues. It is
always better for the trier of fact to hear the story from the witness and not
counsel.
c) Organize your questions topically, giving the witness and the trier of fact the
opportunity to follow the flow of your examination.
16
d) Decide whether it is more persuasive to ask questions in a chronological
order or by theme/issue. The questions posed to the witness must be
presented in some form of order. Do not lurch from topic to topic. This will
confuse the witness and annoy the trier of fact. It will also detract from the
persuasiveness of the witness’ story.
e) Use short, simple language when formulating your questions. Do not use
overly technical language or ―legalese‖.
f) Often, simple ―who, what, where, when, why‖ questions will allow the witness
to give her evidence in a clear and simply manner.
g) Listen to your witness. Often a witness may give an answer that requires
follow-up. If you are not listening, you will miss that opportunity.
h) Use looping techniques to repeat the key theme or answer in a series of
questions on an important issue. For example, in a case involving a car
accident, where the witness has just answered a series of questions
involving her observations of the accident: ―After you saw the Honda rear-
end the Toyota, who did you contact?‖ This repeats helpful evidence and
provides the witness with guidance as to where you are moving next.
i) Prepare to start and finish strong. Deal with less important and/or more
difficult evidence in the middle of your examination.
j) Humanize your witness by asking questions that will elicit empathy. This
helps to build the witness’ credibility and relate-ability.
k) Where appropriate make use of pictures, diagrams or other demonstrative
aids. This will assist the witness in giving her evidence and will give the trier
of fact a concrete visual, to compliment the witness’ words.
2) Hazards to Avoid during Examination-in-chief

a) Do not ask your witness irrelevant questions. If the answer it elicits is not
important to your overall theme or to rebutting your opponent’s case, do not
ask the question.
17
b) While it is important to neutralize bad facts when possible, do not waste your
entire examination-in-chief doing so.
c) Discuss evidentiary issues with your opponent beforehand, so to minimize
objections during your examination-in-chief.
d) Do not ask compound or overly complicated questions such as questions
which contain many facts or technical language. This will only confuse your
witness and the judicial officer.
2.0 WITNESS STATEMENTS
Civil proceedings differ from criminal proceedings in the form of witness evidence
and the process of its preparation. Evidence in criminal proceedings starts with
recording statements at police, gathering necessary exhibits and later on orally
lead this evidence in court. On the other hand, for civil litigation, the law has been
amended to provide for witness statements. These statements contain the witness’
testimony and have to be confirmed at the hearing by a witness and later adopted
as evidence in chief.
The Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules of 2019 S.I. No. 33 of 2019
Under Rule 5 on the Amendment of Order 43, the above principles have been
codified and made specific provisions for the drafting, filing, service and tendering
of witness statements in court. They also provide for the content that should be
covered by witness statements. Rule 5(10) defines a witness statement to mean
written testimony signed by a witness and filed in court and served on the opposite
party for purposed of having it tendered in court as the evidence in chief of the
witness.
Rule 5(2) provides that a witness must appear in court and take oath before their
statement is tendered as evidence in chief. Rules 5(5) then provides that
statements of witnesses who do not appear in court should be expunged from the
18
record. The only except to this being where parties consent to the statement
remaining on record.
Rule 5(3) allows witnesses to correct errors in the statements which do not go to
the substance of the testimony and with leave of court. Rules 5(8) provides for the
content of a witness statement and Rule 5(6) makes the timelines for filing a
witness statement mandatory. Lastly, Rule 5(7) prohibits the hearing of witnesses
without witness statements except with Court’s leave.
2.4 Witness preparation
It is important to note that while witness coaching is prohibited, a process of

witness preparation is permissible and desirable, may extend to advising
witnesses as to the basic requirements for giving evidence, in order to assist
witnesses to give their best at the trial or hearing but risking their evidence
becoming anything other than their own uncontaminated evidence.
The following approach is suggested in relation to any witness preparation process

for the purpose of civil proceedings:
a) Any witness preparation process should normally be supervised or

conducted by a counsel.
b) In any discussions with witnesses regarding the process of giving evidence,
great care must be taken not to do or say anything which could be
interpreted as suggesting what the witness should say, or how he or she
should express himself or herself in the witness box: that would be
coaching.
c) Counsel should only approve or take part in a mock examination-in-chief,
cross-examination or re-examination of witnesses who are to give oral
evidence in the proceedings in question if, and only if:
1) It’s purpose is simply to give a witness greater familiarity with and
confidence in the process of giving oral evidence;
19
2) There is no risk that it might enable a witness to add a specious quality
to his or her evidence; and
3) In conducting any such mock exercises, counsel does not rehearse,
practice or coach a witness in relation to his/her evidence.
FURTHER REFERENCES/READING:
1) Chapters in all Trial Advocacy Text Books share on Examination in Chief.

2) The Evidence Act, Cap 6
3) The Magistrate Court’s Act Cap 16
4) The Civil Procedure Rules S.I 1-79 & the Amendment of 2019
<<<<<END OF TOPIC>>>>>
20
LAW DEVELOPMENT CENTRE
DEPARTMENT OF POST GRADUATE LEGAL STUDIES & LEGAL
AID ACADEMIC YEAR 2024/2025
DOCUMENTARY EXHIBITS
Introduction
An exhibit is a document, record or other tangible object formally introduced as evidence
in the court by a party who wishes to rely on such evidence to prove their case. Exhibits are
the only form, apart from the testimony of witnesses, in which evidence can be received.
Spoken testimony typically presents a recitation of the witness's memories and perceptions.
Exhibits, on the other hand, allow the judicial officers to use their own senses and
perceptions to be persuaded of certain facts.
At trial, exhibits enhance or supplement the testimony of the witnesses. Exhibits can make
information clearer, more concrete, more understandable, and more reliable. In all cases,
Exhibits help court see the facts as opposed to being told.
Types of Exhibits
Although the categories tend to overlap and the lines cannot be drawn with precision, it is often
helpful to think of exhibits as falling into these three categories:
 Real or tangible evidence,
 Demonstrative evidence, and
 Documentary evidence.
We shall deal with Documentary Evidence as our Level I.
Documentary Evidence
Documentary evidence generally refer to virtually writings such as letters, contracts, leases,
memoranda, reports, ledgers, printouts, business records, etc. It also includes photographic and
electronic evidence as we shall see below.
The value of documentary evidence cannot be overstated. Intrinsic writings can provide proof of
past events in a way that mere testimony cannot. Imagine a criminal case in which the
defendant has raised an alibi defense, claiming that on the day of the crime he was visiting
relatives in a distant city. The testimony of the defendant and his family is relevant and
admissible to establish the alibi, but it will be subject to vigorous attack on cross-examination. A
signed hotel receipt for the date in question stands to be far more persuasive than any witness
as to the defendant's whereabouts.
Method of Introducing Documents in Trials
Criminal Trials
In Criminal Trials, usually documents are tendered through the testimony of witnesses.
However, to avoid surprise and ambush, the prosecution provides their documents to the
defence through the discovery process before trials. It is best practice for the defence to also
exchange their documents with the prosecution ahead of time.
Civil Trials
In Civil Trials, documents can be tendered and admitted into evidence either by agreement
between the parties at Scheduling or if the documents are not agreed to, by Counsel formally
applying their admission into evidence.
The Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules of 2019 in amending Order 18 to include
Rule 5A now provide that evidence during civil trials is through witness statements. Rule
5A (8) (j) provides
21
that witness statements shall include documents on which the witness relies, that have not
already been agreed to at the scheduling conference; and under (l) shall sufficiently identify any
document to which the statement refers without repeating its contents, unless it is necessary
for identification of the document. This introduces two different ways documents in civil trials
are admitted into evidence;
Agreed Documents
Documents are agreed to if they are not disputed to by the opposite party. The reasons for
dispute usually are because they do not fulfill the various rules of evidence as to authenticity,
relevance, hearsay etc. The commonly agreed to documents will be those that probably involve
both parties or whose existence and accuracy is not disputed. The process of admitting them
into evidence does not require a formal tendering because parties can consent to the
documents as agreed to during scheduling. They are then listed in the Scheduling
Memorandum, compiled into a Trial Bundle and exhibited at Trial .
Disagreed Documents
Where documents are not admitted to by the opposite party, then the party who wishes to rely
on them must formally lead evidence to prove their authenticity, relevance and fulfillment of
other evidential rules and then formerly apply to court for them to be tendered.
Joint Scheduling Memorandums & Trial Bundles

A trial bundle refers to a collection of all the documents to be relied on at a trial by the judicial
officer, witnesses and other relevant parties. When creating a trial bundle, it should be regarded
as being as much part of the presentation of the case as what is said in court.
Trial Bundles serve many uses such as effective presentation of a case and assistance to all
parties handling the documents to enable the hearing proceed smoothly and expeditiously.
The Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules S.I. No. 33 of 2019 now have detailed
provisions for the conduct of interparty scheduling and preparation of trial bundles
under the Second Schedule. They provide for the bundles to include indexes, be numbered
and made in 5 (five) copies etc. They also provide for the process through which both counsel
must corporate in the preparation of joint scheduling memorandum and trial bundles with
a penalty of costs for uncooperative counsel. The Rules also provide for the treatment
of admitted or agreed documents and disputed or disagreed documents in the bundles.
Note: For your first workshop next week, you will study schedule the said Civil
Procedure (Amendment) Rules S.I. No. 33 of 2019 and conduct the party to party joint
scheduling process as well as create the trial bundle within the firm.
Document References at various stages

Apart from court procedures to produce documents, documents go through different stages
before forming part of the court record. These include;
i. Annextures to Pleadings or Documents on Police Investigation Files
When attached to court pleadings or provided to Defence Counsel.
ii. Identified Documents
When witnesses have introduced them to court but for one reason or another are not
competent to tender them or the documents are not in admissible forms
iii. Exhibit
22
When competent witnesses have introduced the documents and an application has
been made successfully to accept the documents into evidence, they are marked
accordingly by the court. This process can also be achieved by parties agreeing to the
documents at Scheduling and marking the agreed documents as Exhibits.
Foundations
Just as testimony, a witness cannot tender a document unless the document fulfills various
evidential rules. This requires that various backgrounds and foundations must be established to
prove that a witness is competent to tender the documents and that the documents are
admissible before the witness can be taken to specific documents.
Main elements of foundations that affect the credibility of documentary evidence

include;
 Originality,
 Privilege (where a party is law allowed to decline providing evidence),
 Authenticity,
 Relevance,
 Hearsay,
 Evidential challenges with the document
The process of tendering the document into evidence is only necessary where documents have
not been agreed to by the parties. However, a document being agreed to does not mean that
their evidential evidence has been proved and or admitted too. Therefore, the foundation and
relevance of documents must nevertheless be adequately and comprehensively covered even
when documents are agree to.
Where witness statements or affidavits are used, the statement must still demonstrate that;
 They are competent to tender the documents;
 The documents are authentic;
 Any evidential challenges of the documents are dealt with; and
 Their relevance is explained.
Pay attention to the form of questioning depending on the part of the Trial; documents
tendered through examination in chief must be by use of open ended questions to avoid leading
the witness while questions on cross examination may be by use of leading questions.
“Dancing” with Documents

To control the hearing, an advocate must move with efficiency and confidence. Avoid the
fumbling, gambling and abandoning control to guess work or “to whom it may concern”.
One way to establish credibility when representing a client is by being organised and prepared.
There is no better way to show this than how you handle your documents. Consider the
documents your partner in a dance where you must be in sync with the documents and all your
audience at every step of the “dance”.
FOUNDATION FOR SPECIFIC DOCUMENTARY EXHIBITS

Apart from agreements, letters, receipts, reports, newspapers and other ordinary paper
exhibits, there are exhibits which the law requires special foundation for. We shall cover some
of them below;
Pictures:
23
A photograph is more relevant when it fairly and accurately depicts a relevant scene at a
relevant time. Therefore, the focus in analyzing foundation for photographic evidence is
whether the relevant view seen by the witness is fairly and accurately depicted in the
photograph. Where there is no witness that can testify as to whether the picture accurately
shows what that witness saw, the admissibility of the photo is placed in doubt. How do we
know the photo wasn’t photo shopped, or is taken at a different place and time and even of
entirely different event? When a witness has testified that a depiction is fair and accurate, the
evidence gains credibility and the burden of proving any faults with the evidence shifts to the
opponent, who must present evidence that the depiction is unfair itself, or has been presented
or altered in some unfair way. This special foundation must therefore be led.
Audio & Video Recordings:

Audio recordings have for long been used and admitted in evidence and are the
commonest in our Ugandan jurisprudence. In order to submit sound recordings as evidence in
court, it must be established that the audio recording is an authentic representation of the
conversation it is said to record.
In addition to the above, the Justice Stephen Mubiru in ARUA HIGH COURT CIVIL
APPEAL No. 0006 OF 2013 - TWAHA SEBBI OLEGA vs. ALIDRIGA ADINAN
(reported on https://ulii.org/) held that the evidentiary value of a recording depends in
large measure on who said what, but a court’s ability to use that information depends upon
two qualities of the recording: audibility and intelligibility. Audibility relates to whether
the listener is able to hear what is on the recording. Intelligibility relates to whether
the listener is able to understand what the conversants said. These two tests therefore
require that audios fulfil Section 88 of the Civil Procedure Act which stipulates that
English is the official language of Court and be translated if not in English. Therefore Audio
recordings used in our jurisdiction commonly include a transcription of the contents and
additionally, a translation of the transcription if not in English.
A video recording is in law regarded as a document and it has been decided by courts that
there is no difference in principle between a tape recording and a photograph. See the above
decision by ARUA HIGH COURT CIVIL APPEAL No. 0006 OF 2013 - TWAHA
SEBBI OLEGA vs. ALIDRIGA
ADINAN. He further guides that being a document, like any other document being offered
in evidence, a recording must be authenticated: a witness must offer evidence establishing
that the object is what that witness claims it is. He held that the basic process for
foundation of admission of recordings or, on the opposition side, to deny admission of
audio evidence requires that the following be shown;
1. It must be shown that the mechanical transcription device was capable of taking
testimony.
2. It must be shown that the operator of the device was competent to operate the device.
3. The authenticity and correctness of the recording must be established.
4. It must be shown that changes, additions, or deletions have not been made.
5. The manner of preservation of the record must be shown.
6. Speakers must be identified.
7. It must be shown that the testimony elicited was freely and voluntarily made, without
any kind of duress.
The above process also applies when the audios are electronically obtained. This was discussed by
24
Justice Margaret Mutonyi in GULU HCT/02/CV/EP/0001/2014 AMONGIN JANE
FRANCIS OKILI vs. LUCY AKELLO & Another (reported on https://ulii.org/). She held
that before accepting electronic evidence, a court will determine if the evidence is relevant, whether
it is authentic, or hearsay, or whether a copy is acceptable or the original is required. Further that
like any other evidence the proponent of electronic or digital evidence must lay the proper
foundation which makes the evidence reliable. Courts are mainly concerned about reliability of such
digital or electronic evidence. The foundation should include the following:
1. Reliability of the equipment used.
2. The manner in which the basic data was initially entered.
3. The measures taken to ensure the accuracy of data as entered.
4. The method of storing the data and precautions taken to prevent loss or alteration.
5. The reliability of the computer programs used to process the data.
6. And the measures taken to verify the accuracy of the program.
7. What software was used to preserve digital evidence in its original form and to
authenticate it for admissibility?
8. The competence of the person who accessed the original data.
9. This person must be competent to do so and able to give evidence explaining the
relevance and implication of what he did. And finally,
10. An independent third party should be able to examine the process and achieve the same
results.
The test for authenticity was codified by the Electronic Transactions Act 2011 S.7
(2)(a) which provides that “for the purposes of subsection 1(a) (which talks of the
original form) the authenticity of the data message shall be assessed (a) by considering
whether the information has remained complete or un altered except for addition of an
endorsement and any change which arises in the normal communication.”
Section 8 of the same Act then provides for the admissibility and evidential weight of
electronic record. It provides that “ the authenticity of the electronic record system in
which an electronic records system is recorded or stored shall in the absence of
evidence to the contrary be presumed where (a) there is evidence that supports a
finding that at all material times, the computer system or other similar device was
operating properly or if it was not, the fact of its not operating properly did not affect the
integrity of the electronic record and there are no other reasonable grounds to doubt the
integrity of the electronic records system.
Electronic evidence that does not fulfill these tests is not admissible or if admitted is of no
evidential value.
Emails, Website Materials and Social Media Evidence

S.5 of the Uganda Electronic Transactions Act 2011 provides that information shall not be
denied legal effect, validity or enforcement solely on the ground that it is wholly or partly in the
form of data message.
This provision has made Emails and other soft copy evidence admissible once printed. The same
tests for authenticity apply.
The decision of Justice Madrama in COMMERCIAL COURT CIVIL SUIT NO 161 OF
2010 DIAN GF INTERNATIONAL LTD vs. DAMCO LOGISTICS UGANDA
LIMITED & Another (reported on
https://ulii.org/) expounds on the form and preservation emails must be accorded in
order to be given full evidential weight as Exhibits.
The same applies to articles on the internet and social media evidence such as facebook,
twitter, instagram and the post of the like plus Whatsapp Messages.
25
Points to note about the Tendering Process
 Most objections to documents being tendered arise from the lack of evidential foundations
and therefore the remedy may be to lead the witness or call another witness to address the
gaps.
 Documents that are identified are not part of the evidence and counsel tendering them
must endeavour to address the objections upheld and re-apply for their admission as
exhibits. Justice Mubiru in the Olega case above explained that identified items were not
exhibits and they therefore did not from part of the body o f evidence to be evaluated.
 Even where objections to documents are upheld or over ruled, counsel may challenge such
rulings on appeal and it would be up to such an advocate whether to challenge such a ruling
right away or on appeal against the whole judgement.
 It is possible to tender a document through an opposite party’s witness through cross
examination only then the aspects discussed above are fulfilled with the usual cross
examination techniques of controlling the witness by the use of leading questions when
developing the required foundation.
 When documents are adduced by affidavit evidence or witness statements, the foundations
discussed above must be fulfilled in the written testimony or evidence. Otherwise, the
evidence attached is then not admissible or of any weight.
 Admission of evidence does not amount to conceding to the evidential value of it. Aspects of
authenticity and other evidential rules can still be challenged in cross examination and or
submissions and the evidence found wanting expunged from records or not relied on.
SAMPLE CHECKLIST FOR TENDERING EXHIBITS DURING EXAMINATION IN

CHIEF
A checklist of the process of tendering evidence which a party wishes to
rely on but the opposite party disagrees or disputes. The same applies when
such evidence is attached to affidavits or written testimony.
1. Ask the witness question(s) that establish that he is competent a right witness.**
2. Ask the witness question(s) that establish the existence of the exhibit.
3. Ask the witness question(s) that establish sufficient foundation that the witness is able
to identify the exhibit.
4. Ask the witness question that how they would be witness be able to identify the exhibit?
E.g. “If I showed the question, how would you be able to identify it?”. (Have the witness
identify the document in several ways.)
 Date the document was authored
 Who authored the document
 Who has custody of the document
 Who signed the document
 What other features identify the document such as;
 Contents
 Features

Letterhead
 ID number
 Handwriting
5. Make an application to the judge to approach and show the witness the exhibit.
 Request that the witness examine the exhibit.
 Have the witness identify the exhibit; e.g. “What are you holding?”
26
6. Ask questions to have the witness reconfirm the earlier features they relied on to
identify the exhibit. It may seem like a repetition but it is not. The first set of
identification questions in Step 4 is to demonstrate that the witness is familiar with a
document before they see it. While the second set of questions in this Step 6 is to
confirm that this is the document they were referring to earlier. The aspects asked are
to describe the document now that it is in the witness’ hands. E.g; If the exhibit is a
letter;
 What is the date on the document
 Who was the document from
 Who authored the document?
 Who signed the document
 Describe the other features of the document such as;
 Contents
 Features
 Letterhead
 ID number
 Handwriting
7. If necessary, establish any additional foundation to tender the exhibit, for example;
o Originality
o Relevance
o Authentication
o Hearsay Analysis
o Accuracy; etc….
8. Provide opposing counsel with a copy of the exhibit or establish for the record that
counsel already has a copy, also provide judge with a copy or request the Judge and
opposite counsel to turn to a particular page of the trial bundle containing the exhibit.
9. Apply to the Judge to have the exhibit marked and tendered into evidence.
10. Respond to any objections made by opposing counsel regarding the exhibit and wait
for a ruling on the objections.
11. If the objections are over-ruled, wait for the exhibit to be marked by the Judge and
given an exhibit number.
12. After it is marked, use the exhibit and its content persuasively.
**The first and second step may be inter-changed depending on the exhibit.
Further Reading / Demonstration;

 Relevant Sections of applicable laws such as;
 Evidence Act Capt 5
 Civil Procedure Act Cap 71
 The Electronic Transactions Act of 2011
 The Electronic Signatures Act of 2011
 The Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules S.I. No. 33 of 2019
 Relevant sections of Modern Trial Advocacy – Steven Lambert
 Relevant Sections of Civil and Criminal Bench Books.
 All Case mentioned in the above notes.
27
DEPARTMENT OF POST GRADUATE LEGAL STUDIES & LEGAL AID
ACADEMIC YEAR 2024/2025
CROSS EXAMINATION &
IIMPEACHMENT
Introduction & Legal Basis

Cross examination is the process for testing the veracity and accuracy of the testimony
of a witness. It is perceived as the riskiest part of the trial. Usually viewed as a contest
between the lawyer and witness by the fact finder, poor cross examination can end up
adding weight or attracting sympathy to your opponent’s case.
The legal basis/justification for cross examination can be found in the Evidence
Act and Precedents.
Section 137 (1) of the Evidence Act provides for the order of examination as follows;
that witnesses shall be first examined-in-chief, then (if the adverse party so
desires) cross- examined, then (if the party calling them so desires) reexamined.
Case Law also on the other hand emphasizes the duty to cross-examine. Every cross-
examination must comply with an important rule of practice. The rule is that you must
cross- examine on every material fact in dispute. This rule is derived from the decision
in Browne v Dunn (1893) 6 R. 67, H.L cited with approval in our John Kayibanda v
Uganda [1976] H.C.B 253. It was held that evidence that is not challenged in cross-
examination by the party against whom it has been adduced is generally accepted by
court as true unless it is contradicted by other evidence.
Cross-examination is the symbol of adversary justice systems, a constitutional right in

criminal cases and an aspect of due process in civil cases.
Aims of cross examination

Section 145 of the Evidence Act provides for lawful questions in cross-examination as
follows;
When a witness is cross-examined, he or she may, in addition to the questions
hereinbefore referred to, be asked any questions which tend—
(a) to test his or her veracity;
(b)to discover who he or she is and what is his or her position in life; or
(c) to shake his or her credit, by injuring his or her character, although the answer to
those questions might tend directly or indirectly to incriminate him or her, or might
expose or tend directly or indirectly to expose him or her to a penalty or forfeiture.
Cross examination provides an opportunity to highlight inaccuracies in, and generally
discredit, the testimony of an adverse witness.
• To destroy the material parts of the evidence in chief.
• To weaken the evidence in chief, where it cannot be destroyed.
28
• To elicit new evidence helpful to the party cross examining.
• To undermine the witness or shake his credibility.
Apart from the above, the primary aim of cross examination is to tell your story through
the witness and not only to discredit the witness. Therefore, during cross examination,
you the lawyer, are the witness.
The decision to cross-examine

Note the emphasis in Section 137 above that a witness is cross examined if the
adverse party so desires.
Where it is impossible to achieve any of the above aims, do not cross examine.
The Lawyer must look and listen to determine if the evidence to challenged has any of
the following characteristics;
• Contradicts prior testimony of the witness;
• Conflicts with the testimony of other witnesses;
• Conflicts with documentary evidence;
• A hesitant, nervous or uncertain response on a key point;
• Addition or omission of facts on an important issue; and
• An actual admission
• Be alert to the contradictions, inconsistencies, hesitation,
exaggeration, unresponsiveness and parroted or selective
answers.
• Do I really need to ask this witness any questions, or can I save it for another witness?
• Has this witness hurt my case? If yes, where exactly? -
• Can this witness really help me? Where?
• Can I really reverse or weaken the harm caused by this or some other
witness by questioning this witness?
• Is this witness basically honest? -Is this witness knowledgeable?
• Is this witness vulnerable? Where exactly?
• Know When Not to Stand Up at All. Don’t if testimony is:- not damaging, not
germane to any important issue, is indeed devastating but you have no weapons
of mass impeachment
The Content of Cross-examination

Section 137 (2) of the Evidence Act, provides the cross-examination need not be
confined to the facts to which the witness testified on his or her examination-in-chief.
Despite this allowance for wide-open cross-examination, questions must nevertheless
concern relevant issues in the case.
Hence the wording of Section 147 above on “lawful questions” during cross
examination which by implication alludes to the fact that some questions may not be
allowed. This wide-open approach to cross is mainly in English Law and other
jurisdictions insist on very narrow room for cross examination.
Cross examination therefore has rules and ethical restraints which we shall cover in the end.
29
Preparation for Cross-examination
To prepare for cross examination, the lawyer should;
• Have thorough knowledge of one’s own case
• Effective anticipation of the adversary's case
• Familiarity with the witness’ testimony.
• Gathered from witness statements
• Gathered from affidavits
• Meticulous notes from attentive listening during trial
• Investigation of the case, the facts, the pleadings, the evidence and the law.
• Prepare a thorough outline of the objectives and areas to be covered
• Develop credibility and trust with court
To accomplish the above, consider the following preparation

tools; Writing down all the questions
Write down all the questions so that you sharpen your specific questions. This helps in
getting the correct form of the question right as well as with brevity (concise and exact
use of words in writing or speech). When it comes to the actual examination, do not
read from the list as that takes away from the chance for eye contact.
Outlines
Use notes not in the form of written questions mentioned above but an outline to remind
yourself of the points that you intend to make on cross-examination and to ensure that
you do not inadvertently omit anything. Here is an example of an outline in a Fire Truck
Accident case;
Background
i. Business consultant
• Sole proprietor
• Clients are important
• Timeliness and efficiency
ii. Locations and distances
• His home
• His office Parking lot
Accident
i. Plans for day
• Left home at 7:55 a.m.
• Meeting at 8:30 a.m.
ii. Weather
iii. Fire truck
• Didn't see
• Didn't hear
• Didn't stop
Post-accident
i. Phoned office/important client
ii. Didn't call ambulance for plaintiff
30
An outline like this is very easy to follow, organized to tell the story and to
provide a visual pattern that allows you to keep your place. Even when you lose your
place, the sparsity of words makes recovery that much simpler.
Referencing your outlines

Lastly, reference your outline with the sources of the information for the points you want
to make. This will help you refresh a witness’ memory or know exactly where to find the
basis of your information. These are usually previous statements, contracts and
documents and other records that inform the lawyer on what answer to expect.
Techniques of cross-examination
There is no one correct method of cross-examination. A lawyer can use different
techniques for different witnesses. However, to tell your client’s story through an
adverse witness, the essential goal of cross-examination, the technique is witness
control. The best way to control a witness is through;
Use of leading questions
Section 140 of the Evidence Act defines a Leading Question as one that suggests
an answer. And Section 142 of the Evidence Act specifically allows the use of leading
questions in cross examination. A non-leading question invites the witness to wander
away from your story.
Use of Short Questions
If a question contains more than a single fact or implication, it is not short. Divide it. If a
question is more than ten words long, it is not short in execution. Try to shorten it.
Ask enough questions to develop a topic
This topic is normally taken from the outline guiding the lawyer.
Avoid Ultimate Questions
It will often be tempting to confront an adverse witness with one last conclusory
question: "So you just ignored the fire truck, didn't you?" Resist this temptation. It may
unravel all the work you may have accomplished. Instead, save that conclusion for your
final submissions at the end of the trial. Another common mistake is for the lawyer to
attempt to make that argument there and then such as ―May the Court please note that
the witness has admitted ignoring the truck……‖ This is not the place for any
argument or submissions.
Listen to the Witness and Insist on an Answer
There are many reasons why a witness can refuse to answer a question on cross
examination which is mainly refusal to agree with a lawyer or being evasive or elusive.
The lawyer must insist on an answer and this requires that they would have to pay
attention and listen to the answer.
Questions that lose control.

The most common reason why a witness may refuse to answer a question or agree to
the answer suggested by the lawyer is because the lawyer would have lost control of
the witness. This is usually because of the form of question such as the following;
31
• Non-leading Questions; The cardinal rule on cross-examination is to
use leading questions. You can control a witness this way:
Q. You were thirty feet away from plaintiff's car when you first applied your brakes,
correct? But you lose control when you ask:
Q: How far from the plaintiff's car were you when you applied your brakes?
• "Why" or Explanation Questions; Asking a witness to explain is the equivalent
of saying, "I've grown tired of controlling this cross-examination. Why don't you
take over for a while?"
• Fishing Questions. Fishing questions are the ones that you ask in the hope that
you might catch something. Do not ask questions to which you do not know the
answers.
• Long Questions; These multiply a witness's opportunity to find something to

disagree with and the lawyer will not know what exactly the witness disagrees with.
The more words you use, the more chance there is that a witness will refuse to
adopt them all.
Questions to Avoid;
• I put it to you (that you crossed the road);
• I suggest to you (that you crossed the road);
• My client will say (that you crossed the road);
• Are you trying to persuade the magistrate/judge/jury (that you crossed the road)?
None of these is a proper question, even if you add at the end: ―What do you say to
that?‖ Although you may have heard these questions used so many times, you should
never use them.
Never. One judge described such a question as ―ineffectual‖. Not only is it ineffectual, the
question does not address an issue in the case.
Cross-examination Strategy
It is important to have a strategy for your cross examination. Such as one following this order;1
• Friendly information; be friendly and portray a kind demeanor first. It may be cross
examination, but you don’t have to be cross. This is usually achieved through
collection or confirmation of background information.
• Affirmative Information; After exhausting the friendly information, ask questions
that build up the value of your case rather than tear down the opposition's.
• Incontrovertible Information: You can now proceed to inquire about facts that
damage the opposition's case or detract from the witness's testimony, so long as
they are well-settled or documentable. On these questions a witness may be inclined
to hedge or quibble, but you can minimize this possibility by sticking to the sort of
information that ultimately must be conceded.
• Challenging Information; It is unlikely that a witness will cooperate with you once
you begin challenging her memory, perception, accuracy, conduct, or other aspects
of her testimony.
32
Therefore, it is usually desirable to proceed through friendly, affirmative, and
uncontroverted information before you begin to take sharper issue with the witness.
• Hostile Information; Hostile information involves confronting the witness directly.
You may be able to extract the necessary answers to hostile questions, but certainly
you can eliminate all hope of cooperation both then and thereafter. Hostile questions
involve assaults on the witness's honesty, probity, peacefulness, character, or
background. "Didn't you spend time in prison?" "You never
intended to live up to the contract?" "That was a lie, wasn't it?"
Because of the above progression, control of a witness is paramount. Pick your first
points carefully. Start with easy scores and save the difficult points for later. This
ensures that you are efficient and able to add something helful or of importance that
creates a good first impression on the Judicial Officer. In order to do so, you must throw
out the week, medium and unnecessary points that will not bear any fruit. When it is
necessary to deal with challenging or hostile information, avoid the temptation to ―pull
the trigger‖ in cross examination. That is asking the conclusions. This will give the
witness and his lawyer the ―chance to clean up their testimony‖. Save the conclusions
for submissions.
Hallmarks of Good Cross Examination

• It Must Be Absolutely Admissible
• It Should Be Central to Your Theory
• It Should Evoke Your Theme
• It Must Be Undeniable
• It Must Be Stated with Conviction
The Ethics of Cross Examination

• Questions that mislead, confuse or are designed to induce determination by
bias, or other prejudgment outside the evidence, baseless stereotype or
prejudice external to the evidence.
• Questions are improper if unduly annoying, harassing, intimidating, offensive,
oppressive, humiliating, and repetitive or in tone or manner that is belittling,
insulting.
• Don’t ridicule or be sarcastic or discourteous with the witness unless you are
positive that the witness’ credibility has already been totally destroyed before the
court; Uganda v Festo Baze and Another [1972] H.C.B. 222.
• Avoid the expression of personal animosity toward opposing counsel and
witnesses regardless of personal opinion.
• Avoid obstructive tactics, including: bringing frivolous objections, unfounded
objections intended only to disrupt opposing counsel.
• Don’t attempt to proceed in a manner previously barred by the court.
• Don’t ask improper questions.
• Don’t attempt to introduce inadmissible evidence.
33
• Don’t use dilatory actions or tactics, create prejudicial or inflammatory argument or
publicity.
Impeaching a witness
While the general cross examination of witness deals with the weakness of the opponent side’s
case, impeachment dwells on the credibility of a specific witness.
Section 154 of the Evidence Act provides for various ways the credit of a witness may
be impeached by the adverse party.
The general areas that can be covered therefore include;
• Lack of or deficient personal knowledge.
• Lack of reliability.
• A witness with selective memory or deliberate omission of information not in
their favour.
• Show bias / interest / motive / personal interest / character / omissions etc
• Prior inconsistencies such as behavior and statements.
Impeachment in cross-examination is very effective on strong points; it will probably

antagonize the court on minor matters. An unsuccessful impeachment impeaches the
lawyer! Never attempt to impeach a witness unless you are sure of success.
Enjoy your cross examination workshops.
Further Reading
Please read the Chapters on cross examination of the various materials provided.
Demonstration Resources
1. The following Youtube Videos also demonstrate techniques in witness control and
focused lines of questioning that accomplish specific conclusions;
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHd_UlebyoM - Complete exchange
between Sen. Kamala Harris and Attorney General William Barr
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eV0n7vYbwIk - Rep. Al Green
Questions HUD Secretary Ben Carson
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rcVtBcvCTo - Oscar Pistorius appears to
change defense under cross examination
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ZFO2KBdqlU – University of Winsdor
Faculty of Law Cross Examination Training Video 5B
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocRkn35deA4 – University of Winsdor
Faculty of Law Cross Examination Training Video 6
34
TRIAL OBJECTIONS
Introduction
“[a] legally-driven attempt to prevent the admission of evidence (typically) or argument (sometimes) on
the basis that the impugned evidence violates some aspect of the law of evidence or the rules of
procedure.” Igor Ellyn, QC, CS, FCIArb. & Belinda E. Schubert How to Make In-Trial Objections Less
Objectionable, (2011).
Objections are the means by which evidentiary disputes are raised and resolved. Objections may be made
to an attorney's questions, to a witness's testimony, to the introduction or use of exhibits, to a lawyer's
demeanor or behavior, and even to the conduct of the judge. Modern Trial Advocacy, 4 th Edition.
The Purpose of objections

 To keep testimony fair and honest.
 Controlling information getting onto the court record
 Preventing inadmissible evidence
 Preserving the record for proposes of appeal
 Provide the court with an opportunity to rectify erroneous rulings
 To protect your witness
 To ensure proper questioning
 To eliminate waste of time
 To gain tactical advantage
 Provide a witness more time to think
 Break up the testimony of an opposing witness
Examples of possible objections

 Objections to the form of questions; Leading questions, compound questions, argumentative
questions, questions previously asked and answered, repetitive questions, questions calling for
narrative answers, ambiguous or unintelligible
 Objections as nature of evidence; Irrelevant, immaterial, hearsay, lack of personal knowledge,
assuming facts not in evidence, etc. As well as Objections to Exhibits being tendered; Admissibility,
lack of foundation, not authenticated, improper copy, etc.
 Improper conduct of counsel or court
Preparing for objections

 Preparation and anticipation
 Keen knowledge and understanding of substantive as well as procedural law
 Anticipate the testimony of each witness
 Anticipate all documents and exhibits.
The decision to object

 Failure to make a timely objection might be construed as a waiver on appeal. Francis Masaba v.
Uganda[1992-93] H.C.B. 17
 A trial is not an evidence class: it’s a battle for credibility.
35
 Object strategically (only if;-)
 There is a legal basis
 The proffered testimony or exhibit will be detrimental to your case.
 Testimony and evidence that both hurts your case and is objectionable.
 Judge / Magistrate may view you as obstinate or obstructive.
 Judge / Magistrate may think you are incompetent.
 Question is readily fixable.
 Allows opposing counsel the opportunity to explain the value of the evidence objected to.
 Focuses the presiding judicial officer's attention on the impugned evidence.
 There will be times in a trial when an objection may have merit in law but be harmful tactically.
Factors to consider
 Will the evidence I hope to keep out hurt my client’s case if it is admitted?
 Is the evidence I hope to keep out relevant to the case?
 Which rule of evidence does the impugned evidence offend?
 Is the evidence or tactic my opponent is using unfairly ambushing my client?
 If I object, will the presiding judicial officer think I am interfering unfairly?
 Can I rely on the presiding judicial officer to know that this evidence is not relevant??
 Will the evidence I hope to keep out hurt my client’s case if it is admitted?
 Is the evidence I hope to keep out relevant to the case?
 Which rule of evidence does the impugned evidence offend?
 Is the evidence or tactic my opponent is using unfairly ambushing my client?
 If I object, will the presiding judicial officer think I am interfering unfairly?
 Can I rely on the presiding judicial officer to know that this evidence is not relevant??
 Will the presiding judicial officer think there is something to hide?
 How should one make the objection?
 What if the objection is not sustained?
 Should I hold my objection because I have evidence which I may be unable to call if the objection is
accepted?
 Is the presiding judicial officer even paying close enough attention that he or she understands the
significance of the question?
 What exactly will the witness say in response to counsel’s question if there is no objection?
The timing of objections

 As the grounds for objecting become apparent
 The legal basis for the objection
 Sufficiency of the factual basis
 Don’t interrupt the question posed by the opposing counsel
 But don’t wait until the answer is on the record before objecting
 If the grounds for doing so become apparent only after the answer is given, move court to strike the
offending portion off the record.
Making the objection

Note: If there is one essential rule in arguing objections, it is that counsel should not argue with, or even
address, each other. It is the judge who will make the ruling, and the judge who must be convinced. It is
ineffective, distracting, and even insulting to the court when counsel turn to each other to argue their
objections:
 Quickly rise and, as you stand, announce to the court, “Objection, your honour / your Lordship.”
 Court will usually acknowledge you and invite your comments
36
 If counsel opposite remains standing, you may wish to add, politely, "Your Honour, I will give counsel
a moment to be seated before I specify the grounds of my objection".
 State your objection clearly, simply and directly.
 Wait for a response from the Judge / Magistrate.
Responding to an objection
 Don't be resentful. See it as an opportunity for you to rephrase questions better.
 Concede. (If the objection has merit).
 Rephrase the question.
 Withdraw the question or comment that is the subject of an objection.
 Argue on basis of limited admissibility e.g. evidence tendered only for identification.
 Direct response.–Answer the objection with the law supporting the question or submission
 Receive a ruling, favourable or unfavourable, with professional courtesy and dignity.
Important to Note:
 Be certain actually to obtain a ruling on every objection. If none is given, politely insist on one. E.g.
“Your Honour may we please have a ruling on the objection raised.”
 The role of each counsel after a ruling on an objection; the party against whom the objection is made
must make sure the evidence nevertheless makes it to the record while the party who raises the
objection must make sure the offending evidence is not brought onto the record another way.
Ethical and conduct issues

 Ethical issues frequently arise in the context of making and meeting objections. Because the objecting
process is one of the most confrontational aspects of the trial, it often tests counsel's reserves of good
will, civility, restraint, and sense of fair play. The three most common problems are discussed below.
 Don't use it only as a tactical device to interrupt an opponent's examination, cross-examination,
argument or opposing counsel’s concentration.
 Not to be used, to make opposing counsel look bad or to exhibit your superior knowledge of the law
of evidence.
 Act politely and civilly at all times.
 When opposing counsel has an objection: stop your examination, be seated, and permit opposing
counsel to make the objection.
 Don’t bicker with your opponent.
 Don’t be rude.
37
FINAL SUBMISSIONS
Introduction
Submissions are made in civil and criminal cases, civil and criminal applications, and preliminary
objections. Generally, every time the Court needs to make a decision, Counsel will be given an
opportunity to address the Court by making their arguments and those arguments are called
submissions. (See: O.18 r 2 C.PR; S. 131 MCA; S. T.I.A; Rules 27 and 28 of the Court of appeal
Rules; rules 27 and 28 of the Supreme Court Rules.) Final submissions take place after all the
evidence has been presented.
Submissions are an important aspect of trial advocacy. A good case can be easily lost at the final
submission stage just as a marginal case can still be won through final submissions.
Order of addresses
Criminal Trials
In a criminal trial, after the close of the accused person’s case, the accused person is entitled to
address the court, and the prosecutor then is entitled to reply; but if the accused person
adduces no evidence or no evidence other than evidence given by himself or herself, the
accused person is, subject to section 112 and subsection (3) of the M.C.A, entitled to the right
of reply (See section 131 (2) of the Magistrates Courts Act).
In trials before the High Court, if the accused person, or any one of several accused persons,
adduces any evidence, the advocate for the prosecution is entitled to reply (See section 77 of
the Trial on Indictments Act.
Civil Trials
As regards civil suits, counsel for the plaintiff will be the first to present the final submissions,
the defendant’s advocate will then present his or hers. After the defence has presented its final
submission, the advocate for the plaintiff has the opportunity for a rebuttal submission.
Purpose
Written or oral arguments to persuade a court or tribunal to decide a matter in your client’s
favour. They constitute an opportunity for each party to summarise the evidence, tie it together
with the relevant law and key themes, in order to convince the court why his or her position
should prevail. The goal is to establish a persuasive link between the facts of the case and the
law.
Structuring the Final Submission.

The process of formulating final submissions starts from the day the advocate first picks up the
file, from the mo ments when the advocate first starts contemplating the case, and from the first
time the advocate looks into the eyes of the client, prepares a theme, a theory and strategy. An
38
advocate preparing for submissions though must be extremely flexible and must listen carefully
during the trial. The advocate should take notes throughout the entire trial in order to refer only
to evidence which has actually been admitted into trial. Albert Krieger said about final
submissions that “its genesis is in the foresight, the imagination, the dexterity, and the wit of
the lawyer. It is shaped from the clay of the first meeting with the client, formed with the
preparation for trial, and fired in the kiln of the trial itself.” (Albert Krieger is an American
defence lawyer. He is a nationally recognized expert on cross examination. He was the recipient
of the National Association of Criminal Defence Lawyers’ 1995 Robert C. Heeney Memorial
Award as well as their Lifetime Achievement Award in 1987).
The most important aspect of a good final submission is the ability to organise arguments and
place them into a structure that allows for an effective presentation of those arguments. The
arguments should be an organised, well reasoned presentation which emphasises the strengths
of the client’s case and addresses the flaws of the opponent’s case.
Example of outline for structuring defence skeleton arguments in a criminal trial;
1. Start with a convincing statement that the accused did not commit the offence, (or did so
but with a lower degree of culpability).
2. Lay out for the court what is at issue in the case (and maybe even what is not).
3. Lay out the defence case theory [Reiterate your theory of the case].
4. Argue the law [Explain the law and show how the evidence satisfies all legal requirements
for a decision in your favour]
i. The Presumption of Innocence
ii. The Burden of Proof
iii. Standard of Proof / Beyond a Reasonable Doubt.

iv. The elements / ingredients of the offence.
v. Other Case Specific legal principles, e.g. evidential ones.
5. Argue the Facts [in relation to each of the ingredients]. I
i. Facts in Evidence [Emphasize favourable evidence].
ii. Arguing facts that directly undermine evidence presented by the state.
iii. Arguing facts that affirmatively promote your case theory.
iv. Absence of Facts [Rebut opponent’s allegations].
6. Attacking the Integrity of the Investigation
7. Conclusion [Suggest specific ways for the court to resolve the case].
Example of outline for structuring defence skeleton arguments in a civil trial;

1. Brief introduction i.e what the matter is about
2. State the burden and standard of proof
3. Tackle each issue/ingredient/ground of the case/application
i. State the law on every point,
ii. Cite written law first,
iii. Then cases bear in mind which authorities are binding and which are persuasive
iv. Try to distinguish authorities cited by the other side
39
4. Apply the law to the facts as presented in the oral evidence or affidavits
i. Highlight the strength and credibility of your evidence e.g corroboration, impressive
demeanour of witnesses, withstanding cross examination e.t.c
ii. Contrast your evidence with the evidence of the opposite side on those points.
iii. Show the weaknesses
iv. Explain inconsistencies and contradictions in your evidence.
v. Show that they are minor.
vi. Highlight the major inconsistencies and contradictions in the other party’s evidence.
5. Conclude by suggesting ways for the court to resolve the issue /ground in your favour.
When to concede
 If the law and evidence are not in your client’s favour, be prepared to concede
 You may abandon an application
 You may concede an application i.e not oppose it
 You may advise a client to plead guilty
 You may advise the DPP to withdraw a case
 You may advise a plaintiff to withdraw a case or accept a settlement
 You may advise a defendant to concede liability and mitigate damages or accept a
settlement
 Plea in mitigation/allocutus (See Uganda v Charles Eliba [1978] HCB 273) & the
sentencing guidelines)
 Consider non-custodial sentences e.g caution, community service, fine
Hallmarks of an effective final submission

 In general, a good final submission has the following characteristics:
 It clearly tells the court what decision you want and why.
 It is logically based on the evidence.
 It is consistent with common sense.
 It accounts for all of the important evidence.
 It concentrates on the most important items of evidence.
 It avoids becoming bogged down in reviewing uncontested or trivial matters.
 It explains both why you are right and why your opponent is wrong.
 It uses specific evidence and specific legal principles, not generalizations.
 It appeals to the court’s sense of fairness and justice
Style of presentation
Present the final submission in a style which one is comfortable with. Some advocates prefer a
loud, strong style while others prefer a calm, persuasive presentation. It is important for the
advocate to settle on a style that is comfortable and appropriate to the client’s case.
The advocate should not read from a written text of the argument, though an outline or
skeleton arguments may be helpful.
40
Remember good argument is not just oratory; nor is oratory necessarily good argument. The goal is not to win an
academy award for dramatic performance.
Whatto avoid during final submissions

 A good final submission must be passionate and heartfelt while avoiding the following pitfalls;
 Making or providing improper statements or citations of the law.
 Misstating the evidence. Stick to the record and do not give evidence from the Bar.
 Invite speculation about unproved facts.
 Stating personal beliefs.
 Suggest that the appellate courts will correct any mistakes the court makes.
 Improperly exciting prejudice, passion, or sympathy, e.g by using inflammatory language. Avoid any
derogatory remarks about opposing counsel or the opposing party.
 It is not a time to show off. If the advocate makes the submission about himself or herself and his or
her achievements, by talking at the court instead of with it, by being condescending in voice and
mannerisms, by telling the court what to do instead of showing it the way and letting it get there on its
own, the court will be put off.
 Avoid lengthy final submissions, they can result in a number of undesirable consequences: your
major point may become lost in a mass of trivial issues, the court may become bored and stop listening,
arguments may become disorganised, or you may even raise doubts about your own case. Stick to the
time allocated to you for oral submissions. Stick to the prescribed length of written submissions
Further Resources
 Quick guide to oral advocacy
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLX5UauD6HM_Mfmf3SVGTK1xT2n9sWIYYw
 Extract from Persuading Judges by Antonio Scalia.
 Sections of all materials on making Oral or Closing Arguments / Final Submissions.
41

24-25 Trial Advocacy Lecture Notes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

24-25 Trial Advocacy Lecture Notes

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

24-25 Trial Advocacy Lecture Notes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TRIAL

LAW DEVELOPMENT CENTER

CY LECTURE Trial Advocacy Team

May you grow as you go through the Bar Course.

Examination in Chief ............................................................................................... 7

Documentary Exhibits ............................................................................................ 21

Cross Examination and Impeachment ................................................................... 28

Trial Objections ....................................................................................................... 35

Final Submissions ................................................................................................... 38

WHY HAVE A CASE THEORY?

Your case theory controls;

A theory of the case consists of the following parts:

A detailed look at Theme

• In a criminal case, where the accused is an unwilling participant, an example can be

2. Planning the Presentation of Your Case.

a) Consider Your Potential Witnesses and Exhibits

b) Decide Which Witness to Call and their order.

Consider the following suggestions;

3. Planning Your Cross-Examinations

4. Suit disposal strategy

Example of Civil Case Disposal Plan

1.0 MODULE 02: EXAMINATION IN CHIEF AND WITNESS STATEMENTS

1.2 Learning Outcomes:

Module 03: Examination in Chief and Witness Statements

1.4 Definition of Examination in Chief:

Module 03: Examination in Chief and Witness Statements

1.5 Objectives of Examination in Chief:

Examination in chief of a witness is intended to achieve a number of objectives;

1.5.1 Major Objectives

1.5.2 Minor Objectives

Module 03: Examination in Chief and Witness Statements

1.6 The Directed Approach to Examinations-in-Chief

1.6.1 Effective questioning techniques

- The Difference between closed questions and leading questions

1.6.2 Moving from “open questions” to “directed examination”

1.6.3 Understanding the Importance of Preparation

 What does an unplanned examination-in-chief look like?

 How to elicit the information you need from your witness

1.6.4 Headlines and transitions

 Why are headlines so important;

Module 03: Examination in Chief and Witness Statements

 The witness who talks too quickly or too softly;

 The rambling witness;

 Dealing with partial or insufficient answers;

 Using notes to help direct questioning;

 Making eye contact, and with whom;

1.7 Leading Questions

During examination-in-chief the advocate is forbidden from asking their witnesses

Module 03: Examination in Chief and Witness Statements

1.11 Open and Closed Questions

Module 03: Examination in Chief and Witness Statements

Module 03: Examination in Chief and Witness Statements

1.12.1 Start with the Basics

1.12.2 Be nice to the witnesses

1.12.3 Align the Evidence with the Case Theory

Module 03: Examination in Chief and Witness Statements

1.12.4 Control the witness's story telling

1.13 Checklist for an Effective Examination-in-chief or Preparing your

Module 03: Examination in Chief and Witness Statements

4) Create an outline for your examination