OVERVIEW OF RULES OF FORM

1. The basic procedural principle of offering witness testimony is that it must be presented in question & answer format:
a. The attorney asks questions.
b. The witness supplies answers.

2. The attorney must ask a question and not make a statement. If the attorney makes a remark, such as "That's very odd, considering it was pitch dark outside," you may object that "This is a statement, not a question."

3. The only consistently enforced rule is that leading questions may not be used on direct examination. They may be used on cross-examination. There are several exceptions:
a) laying foundations
b) examining children
c) asking about preliminary or uncontested matters
d) questioning hostile or adverse witnesses
e) when necessary to help a witness who is having difficulty testifying, e.g., a rape victim uncomfortable describing the details of the attack.
f) refreshing recollection.

4. A leading question is one in which the attorney characterizes a fact in the attorney's words and merely asks the witness to agree with it, depriving the witness of the opportunity to characterize it in his or her own way, e.g.: "Q: It was pitch dark outside, wasn't it?"

5. If the attorney question farther and characterizes a fact in a way that is inconsistent with the evidence at trial, you can object that:
a) The attorney is misstating the evidence or misquoting the witness
b) The attorney is assuming a fact not in evidence at all.

6. If question contains not just a factual assertion but an argumentative conclusion, you may object that the attorney is being "argumentative." For example: "It was so dark, you couldn't possibly have seen anything, could you?" Examples (all from actual cases):
a) Would it surprise you to know that the victim had a substantial blood alcohol level that day?
b) Did you know that the defendant injected people with drugs, performed abortions on women, had an illegitimate child, killed a woman during an abortion, was charged with a sex offense against his daughter.
c) You're telling this jury you can recognize a man wearing a beard and moustache 5 years after seeing him, when you saw him before only as a boy?
d) If the lawyers can't figure out how she wanted to dispose of her property, how do you suppose she was mentally competent?
e) The truth is that you have no recollection, do you?
f) [after witness expressed uncertainty whether the robber had a moustache] Surely you know what a moustache is?

7. Questions must also be reasonably clear. You could (but many lawyers don't) object to questions that are:
a) Compound - involving two or more separate issues
b) Ambiguous, vague, or incomprehensible.

8. On direct examination, once a question has been asked and answered, the process of eliciting that item of evidence is completed. If the attorney attempts to go back over the same evidence, you may object that it has been asked and answered. This rule applies only within one phase of the examination of one witness. On cross-examination, attorneys may go over the same ground several times until the judge's patience runs out.

9. Questions must be asked in a professional manner and the witness treated with respect. You can't embarrass, browbeat, harass, yell at, or insult a witness. That's called badgering.

10. On direct examination, the witness may not usually testify in a narrative (extended testimony moving from topic to topic without any guidance from the attorney.

11. On cross-examination, the witness must answer the question asked, and may not give nonresponsive answers or volunteer testimony that was not asked for.