Ms. Erika Wilson demonstrates a proper direct examination.

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 8 сер 2012
  • The following direct examination is of the plaintiff, Ms. Washington in
    a notional wrongful death case.

КОМЕНТАРІ • 63

  • @michaelc9238
    @michaelc9238 7 років тому +9

    great video. I am a practicing lawyer from Australia, this was great to see!

  • @Wise_Observant
    @Wise_Observant 7 років тому +3

    I enjoy the professor's feedback very much, thank you.

  • @blackmancanjump23
    @blackmancanjump23 3 роки тому +1

    Thank you so much for sharing this video!

  • @rebeccareeder658
    @rebeccareeder658 10 років тому

    Thanks for the example. Lots of help

  • @thatwickedsmahttraumachick
    @thatwickedsmahttraumachick 2 роки тому +2

    I have to examine my downs sister because she lied about me to the state. I’m sick to my stomach. I just need to ask two simple questions and she won’t lie. But I want to also prove her parental alienation symptoms and they incredible emotional abuse her agency inflicted as well as her care provider. Deeeeep breaths! God be with us. I want my sister back ❤️

  • @lagimmediafiles6478
    @lagimmediafiles6478 2 роки тому +1

    Great Video im Studying Law here in the Philippines...

  • @joannabuuma5525
    @joannabuuma5525 8 років тому

    great piece

  • @c-LAW
    @c-LAW 7 років тому

    Why are these videos age restricted?

  • @bleacherz7503
    @bleacherz7503 3 роки тому +1

    Can an attorney refer to notes for questions or so jurors loose patience with that ?

  • @MsLace1
    @MsLace1 10 років тому

    Great Help! Thank you very much.

  • @kerimsemed128
    @kerimsemed128 10 років тому +11

    woah man that lady is good! Thanks this will help me ALLOT!

  • @loveiseternity
    @loveiseternity 6 років тому +1

    In Australia, a question that asks the witness why they’re here today might be seen as self-serving and therefore not a permissible question.

    • @Hear4Metallica
      @Hear4Metallica 3 роки тому +1

      in the US it not only establishes capacity, but is allowable to set the table for the Jury. Obviously direct is pro witness (self serving).

  • @greenspringvalley
    @greenspringvalley 10 років тому +10

    Ms. Wilson is a good actress. She could be in movies. I hope she uses her powers for good.

  • @MysteriousImage
    @MysteriousImage 8 років тому +6

    At 0:22 you said "about the accident" that implies that her children's death was a accident therefor the person should not be ruled in any punishments because, it was just an accident

    • @davidkim5971
      @davidkim5971 7 років тому +3

      Good point.However, at any point it was MURDER because Rebacca Heartwill killed the woman's two sons.

    • @benjaminmiller7937
      @benjaminmiller7937 5 років тому +3

      Calling something an "accident" isn't the same as calling it faultless. Accidents are a result of negligence.

  • @ginellecalderon9255
    @ginellecalderon9255 9 років тому +8

    if there are no jury who do I ask her to introduce herself to

  • @ljp9402
    @ljp9402 4 роки тому

    so good

  • @johncener6917
    @johncener6917 5 років тому

    I’m from Mrs.Abuzharia’s class

    • @zainabzaidi5016
      @zainabzaidi5016 5 років тому

      Same, but are you allowed to write that?

  • @safa9408
    @safa9408 6 років тому +1

    is she on prosecution?

  • @Swaggerballer
    @Swaggerballer 8 років тому +16

    "Did you go with them to the park?" 2:22
    Is that a leading question?

    • @emmamorris3736
      @emmamorris3736 8 років тому +3

      +Erika Wilson I love your voice its so soothing😜😍

    • @loveiseternity
      @loveiseternity 6 років тому +19

      It’s leading if there has not yet been mention of a park, as it suggests a fact that hasn’t been raised by the witness. If the witness has already referred to a park then it can form part of a looping question.

    • @allisson5790
      @allisson5790 5 років тому +1

      No

    • @nationalistcanuck2877
      @nationalistcanuck2877 5 років тому +1

      Emma Morris That’s a different Erika buddy

    • @Scott-gt4xb
      @Scott-gt4xb 4 роки тому

      @@loveiseternity I don't know if that is the case, the question can be answered yes I went with them to the park, or no I didn't go with them to the park. "You went with them to the park?" is a leading question, but can be a looping question, or even a background question of immaterial or stipulated to facts.

  • @momodouy.m.sallah3956
    @momodouy.m.sallah3956 9 років тому +2

    A wonderful cross examination every law/bar student must hear.

  • @godiegogo4798
    @godiegogo4798 6 років тому

    Same

  • @wjggmt1180
    @wjggmt1180 3 роки тому

    I had six kids. After the accident I have 5. WFT?

  • @Scott-gt4xb
    @Scott-gt4xb 5 років тому +1

    Did anyone tell you what happened? Objection hearsay

    • @nationalistcanuck2877
      @nationalistcanuck2877 5 років тому

      Scott Bernstein Fair enough, easy way to erase her statement about the car lol

    • @PapaArkansas870
      @PapaArkansas870 4 роки тому

      Might be present sense impression.

    • @Scott-gt4xb
      @Scott-gt4xb 4 роки тому

      @@PapaArkansas870 Someone telling you happened is only present sense impression if they were saying what happened when they were perceiving it (e.g. talking to a 911 operator while you witness a robbery or someone leaving a house).

    • @PapaArkansas870
      @PapaArkansas870 4 роки тому

      @@Scott-gt4xb Yes. So it would be admissible only if its established that the declarant perceived the event contemporaneously therewith.

    • @Scott-gt4xb
      @Scott-gt4xb 4 роки тому +2

      @@PapaArkansas870 so here, where the mother of the kids involved in the event is being asked did anyone tell you what happened (after the event occurred) there is no present sense impression hearsay exception. My objection would be sustained.

  • @poison1324
    @poison1324 5 років тому

    Isn’t the witnesses answer to the question: where do you live? An objection on the grounds of non-responsive answer....???????

    • @Scott-gt4xb
      @Scott-gt4xb 5 років тому

      Ya, it is non responsive, but who is going to object to that?

    • @medha7176
      @medha7176 5 років тому

      You always object the question asked by the attorney

    • @seanwaddell2659
      @seanwaddell2659 4 роки тому +1

      Yeah, but also the entire line of questioning could be objected to on relevance and possible on prejudicing the jury against the defendant.

    • @poison1324
      @poison1324 4 роки тому

      Sean Waddell thats what i was thinking, because she’s wasting time of the court. And I don’t personally think my opposing council or judge would like that.

    • @poison1324
      @poison1324 4 роки тому

      Medha Srinath ummm, I don’t think so, you can also object witnesses as well. And it really helps if you know how to play with it.

  • @DavisThuranira
    @DavisThuranira 2 роки тому

    Great

  • @rafaelallan
    @rafaelallan 6 років тому +3

    Did Ms. xxxx ever apologize to you?
    is it not an objectionable question? leading? thanks!

    • @loveiseternity
      @loveiseternity 6 років тому +4

      Rafael Allan it’s not leading because the witness already raised the issue of her apologising.

  • @kimanimaina6461
    @kimanimaina6461 2 роки тому

    Good

  • @renemcintyre3653
    @renemcintyre3653 4 роки тому +1

    Where were you when the children were killed?

  • @ginnadanny8148
    @ginnadanny8148 Рік тому

    Question : where did you lived ?
    Answer : It not the best neighbourhood, we don’t really had that much but the family was priceless we had each other.
    If the Question would be by Juan Martinez : And where did you lived ?
    Answer : It not the best neighbourhood, we don’t really had that much but the family was priceless we had each other.
    JM : Did I ask you how much that you had ? Or if your family was priceless?
    I asked you where did you lived !!
    Do you understand that? 😂 😂