Professional Documents
Culture Documents
A Guide To Direct Examination and Cross
A Guide To Direct Examination and Cross
Vol. 31 No. 5
ByJack E. McGehee
Jack E. McGehee is senior partner at McGehee, Chang, Barnes, Landgraf in Houston, Texas, and specializes in personal injury
trial law. This article is excerpted and adapted from the author’s book The Plaintiff’s Case: From Voir Dire to
Verdict (1997).
Witness examination is the “meat and potatoes” of a jury trial. Contrasted with the flexibility of
opening statement, witness examination is more rigid, often more mundane, but also more precise.
These qualities are both strengths and weaknesses. Countless cases have been lost by lawyers who
have blockbuster opening statements but who failed to appreciate adequately the purpose of direct
and cross-examination.
Direct Examination
Regardless of the brilliance and eloquence of voir dire and opening, the jury is eager to meet the
people they’ve been hearing about, to listen to real evidence, to go to work.
For good or bad, jury members are confident their impressions of the litigants are correct and
complete. The introductory moments of direct examination are a valuable chance to show jurors there
is more to be heard, learned, and assessed. Although the trial to date has centered on the lawyers,
now both spotlight and style shift to focus on witnesses and testimony. That shift in no way implies an
attorney’s abdication of courtroom command, however. In fact, the style shift underscores command
as it yields the starring role and assumes the vital function of facilitator. The jury, therefore, sees a
new and comforting facet of attorney competence, confidence, and mastery of the case.
Instead of narrative teaching, direct examination shifts to short, crisp bursts of inquiry that invite
attentive listening and satisfy curiosities. The staccato style quickly is perceived as a juror service,
almost instantly voicing questions as they pop into the jurors’ own minds. For example, if a witness
finishes an answer by stating, “I was shocked,” the greatest jury service (and highest drama) is
performed with a prompt and simple “Why?”
Qualities of a good direct examination. After analysis of the available evidence, the next most
important decision is how testimony will be “packaged.” If the witness will tell a story, the best form is
Cross-Examination
Cross-examination’s role is damage control. If it is done well, the hostile witness will not gain much
ground. If it is done poorly, however, cross-examination can result in a turning of the tide. An
important, and obvious, goal during cross-examination is to avoid assisting the witness with being
persuasive to the jury.
The two most difficult tasks facing us in cross-examination are eliminating wiggle room in our
questions and knowing when to stop. Wiggle room is available to the hostile witness whenever the
question asks too much. We should avoid wiggle room by asking questions that can be answered only
“yes” or “no.” A string of “yes” answers implies that the witness has been won over; a string of “no”
answers implies some kind of weakness or failure on the part of the witness.
Q: You’re not a medical doctor.
A: No.
Conclusion
Direct and cross-examination are where the jury becomes familiar with the evidence, with the
credibility of witnesses, and with your true belief in your case. Be prepared, but be fluid. Although
direct and cross are more structured than opening statement, they are still dynamic. Your ability to
connect with the witness during direct, or discredit the witness during cross, ultimately requires you to
stay true to your own style and believe in yourself. If, during direct and cross, you score half the goals
you set out to score, then you will be a world champion.