Cross-examination

4 definitions found

From The Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.48 [gcide]:

  cross-examination \cross"-ex*am`i*na"tion\
     (kr?s"?gz-?m`?-n?"sh?n; 115), n. (Law)
     The interrogating or questioning of a witness by the party
     against whom he has been called and examined. See
     {Examination}.
     [1913 Webster]


  
     2. [fig.] close or detailed questioning.
        [WordNet 1.5]

From The Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.48 [gcide]:

  Examination \Ex*am`i*na"tion\, n. [L. examinatio: cf. F.
     examination.]
     1. The act of examining, or state of being examined; a
        careful search, investigation, or inquiry; scrutiny by
        study or experiment.
        [1913 Webster]
  
     2. A process prescribed or assigned for testing
        qualification; as, the examination of a student, or of a
        candidate for admission to the bar or the ministry.
        [1913 Webster]
  
              He neglected the studies, . . . stood low at the
              examinations.                         --Macaulay.
        [1913 Webster]
  
     {Examination in chief}, or {Direct examination} (Law), that
        examination which is made of a witness by a party calling
        him.
  
     {Cross-examination}, that made by the opposite party.
  
     {Re["e]xamination}, or {Re-direct examination}, (Law) that
        questioning of a witness at trial made by the party
        calling the witness, after, and upon matters arising out
        of, the cross-examination; also called informally
        {re-direct}.
  
     Syn: Search; inquiry; investigation; research; scrutiny;
          inquisition; inspection; exploration.
          [1913 Webster]

From WordNet (r) 2.0 [wn]:

  cross-examination
       n : (law) close questioning of a hostile witness in a court of
           law to discredit or throw a new light on the testimony
           already provided in direct examination

From Bouvier's Law Dictionary, Revised 6th Ed (1856) [bouvier]:

  CROSS-EXAMINATION, practice. The examination of a witness, by the party who 
  did not call him, upon matters to which he has been examined in chief. 
       2. Every party has a right to cross-examine a witness produced by his 
  antagonist, in order to test whether the witness has the knowledge of the 
  things he testifies and if, upon examination, it is found that the witness 
  had the means and ability to ascertain the facts about which he testifies, 
  then his memory, his motives, everything may be scrutinized by the cross- 
  examination. 
      3. In cross-examinations a great latitude is allowed in the mode of 
  putting questions, and the counsel may put leading questions. (q.v.) Vide 
  further on this subject, and for some rules which limit the abuse of this 
  right, 1 Stark. Ev,. 96; 1 Phil. Ev. 210; 6 Watts & Serg. 75. 
       4. The object of a cross-examination is to sift the evidence, and try 
  the credibility of a witness who has been called and given evidence in 
  chief. It is one of the principal tests which the law has devised for the 
  ascertainment of truth, and it is certainly one of the most efficacious. By 
  this means the situation of the witness, with respect to the parties and the 
  subject of litigation, his interest, his motives, his inclinations and his 
  prejudices, his means of obtaining a correct and certain knowledge of the 
  facts to which he testifies the manner in which he has used those means, his 
  powers of discerning the facts in the first instance, and of his capacity in 
  retaining and describing them, are fully investigated and ascertained. The 
  witness, however artful he may be, will seldom be able to elude the keen 
  perception of an intelligent court or jury, unless indeed his story be 
  founded on truth. When false, he will be liable to detection at every step.  
  1 Stark. Ev. 96; 1 Phil. Ev. 227; Fortese. Rep. Pref. 2 to 4; Vaugh. R. 143. 
       5. In order to entitle a party to a cross-examination, the witness must 
  have been sworn and examined; for, even if the witness be asked a question 
  in chief, yet if he make no answer, the opponent has no right to cross-
  examine. 1 Cr. M. & Ros. 95; 1 16 S. & R. 77; Rosc. Cr. Ev. 128; 3 Car. & P. 
  16; S. C. 14 E. C. L. Rep. 189; 3 Bouv. Inst. n. 3217. Formerly, however, 
  the rule seems to have been different. 1 Phil. Ev. 211. 
       6. A cross-examination of a witness is not always necessary or 
  advisable. A witness tells the truth wholly or partially, or he tells a 
  falsehood. If he tells the whole truth, a cross-examination may have the 
  effect of rendering his testimony more circumstantial, and impressing the 
  jury with a stronger opinion of its truth. If he tells only a part of the 
  truth, and the part omitted is favorable to the client of the counsel cross-
  examining, he should direct the attention of the witness to the matters 
  omitted. If the testimony of the witness be false, the whole force of the 
  cross-examination should be directed to his credibility. This is done by 
  questioning him as to his means of knowledge, his disinterestedness, and 
  other matters calculated to show a want of integrity or veracity, if there 
  is reason to believe the witness prejudiced, partial, or willfully dishonest.
  
  Arch. Crim. Pl. 111. See Credible Witness.