What is Cross-examination?

“The process of questioning the opposing advocate for purposes of clarification and refutation.” (Kay and Ziegmueller)

Five primary purposes: To clarify previous statements of the

witness. To commit the witness to a particular

position on an issue. To refute the validity of a previous

statement. To prepare the way for constructive

arguments. To undermine the credibility of respondents.

Clarify previous statements:

Previous statements given by a witness may be unclear.

Avoid unnecessary questions of clarification.

Clarifies definitions of terms.

Commit to a position:

The more certain you are of where a witness stands, the less possibility there will be for a strategic shift in position later in the debate.

Helps you avoid wasting time on inappropriate arguments.

Refute previous statements:

Most important function of cross-examination.

Contradictions, irrelevant judgments, overgeneralizations, inadequate evidence, incomplete analysis—all of these and more can be revealed through cross-examination.

Prepare for constructive arguments:

Using cross-examination will help to establish the basis for constructive arguments.

Lines of questioning will help in discovering the arguments the opposition will set forth.

Undermine witness credibility: Used in courts of law the most, however,

can be seen in politics as well. Can be inappropriate in academic debate.

Techniques of the cross-examiner: Construct basic questions. (avoid

random questions) Use factual questions. (avoid

opinion based questions) Use a short series of questions.

Ex. “You have said that there is no significant relationship between the private ownership of guns and violence, is that correct?

More:

Use analogies and parallel situations. Examples: “One of your arguments is

that marijuana should be legalized because it is extremely difficult to enforce antimarijuana laws. Am I right?”

“Is the purpose of our laws against speeding to deter drivers from driving too fast?”

More: Do not draw conclusions. ( be

careful about going too far with your line of questioning) Example: “By your reasoning then,

shouldn’t we also legalize speeding and overtime parking and murder?”

This allows the respondent to qualify and explain his or her answers and makes the cross-examination less useful.

More: Cut off the witness. (use closed

ended questions) Drop unproductive questioning.

(answers may not help you) Use admissions. (follow up on

answers in the witnesses statements)

Develop stock questions. (Use standard questions)

Techniques for Respondents: Think before answering. (avoid rushing) Qualify your answer. (gives the witness

an opportunity provide more relevant information than was required) Questioner: “Isn’t true that the number of

deaths from airplane accidents has increased in each of the last three years?”

More:

Witness: “The number of passenger miles flown has also increased significantly and airplane travel remains the safest form of transportation. But yes, there has been some increase in deaths from air travel.

Placed the answer in a less damaging context.

More:

Understand the Question. (seek clarification)

Provide obvious answers. (short answers)

Admit ignorance. (avoid bluffing) Do not permit questioner

conclusions. (questioner should stick to questions)

Conclusion: Cross-examination differs from

direct examination in that the respondents are less likely to be friendly to the questioner’s cause.

In cross-examination the questioner takes control.

A respondent should remain calm, competent, and in control.