Win Your Case: How to Present, Persuade, and Prevail--Every Place, Every Time

by Gerry Spence

Passing the witness for cross-examination. Despite what I have said, there are those witnesses who ought not be cross-examined. Witnesses who merely establish foundation facts, witnesses who testify to matters not in dispute, who can offer nothing to otherwise support our case—these witnesses should be passed with a courteous, “No, questions, Mrs. Perkinson. Thank you for coming.” I see lawyers who believe it is their utter duty to cross-examine every witness who has ever walked into a courtroom. The examiner has reduced himself to a nitpicker—someone who soon wears out his welcome with the jury, who bores the jury with his love of all the junk in the junk pile of facts that surround every case. At his best he is seen as one who provides little more than endless piles of trivia. When it comes time for him to cross on a critical fact, the jury is likely as not to miss the point, because he’s made so few along the way. When the lawyer gets up to cross-examine he should have a significant story in mind that he wants to tell with this witness. He should be prepared to make an important point. Otherwise he should remain seated and provide the jury with blessed silence. I look for the witness I can pass with a kindly, “No questions.” It adds to my own credibility, and it clearly tells the jury that if I choose to cross I have something important to provide them. They should be on the edge of their seats to find out what it is.