1. Same story, different day...........year ie more of the same fiat floods the world
    Dismiss Notice
  2. There are no markets
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Week of 6/24/2017 Closing prices & Chg Over Last Wk---- Gold $1256.40 Silver $16.64 Oil $43.01 USD $96.94
  4. "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding high finance, politics, constructionist Constitution, and mental masturbation of all types"
    Dismiss Notice

Courtroom practice on cross-examination 101

Discussion in 'U.S. Constitution & Law' started by Goldhedge, Aug 4, 2017.



  1. Goldhedge

    Goldhedge Moderator Site Mgr Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2010
    Messages:
    28,742
    Likes Received:
    32,852
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Planet Earth
    Tao Lauwto Tao of Law
    6 hrs
    ·


    Okay folks, a little bit of Courtroom practice on cross-examination 101.

    Rule #1: Learn to do it RIGHT.

    Rule #2: Learn to do it WELL.

    Rule #3: Unless you're Gerry Fuckin' Spence, you ask ONLY leading yes/no type questions on cross-examination, PERIOD!

    Rule #4: Don't fuck up Rules 1-3.

    ==================================

    I am helping out with some advice on an "open container" charge. The cops, as they almost always do in these cases, screwed the pooch on evidence.

    The problem is, most folks don't have a clue how to trap the officer into admitting that s/he actually has no evidence of the alleged offense, and it is the officer's own fault.

    What I am going to show you is just how to use that fact to get the charge dropped, even in the middle of trial.

    We will begin with the person narrative and then the follow up questions I originally asked the individual in relation to the facts of his case and build upon that for our cross-examination.

    ==================================
    I will be calling in about this on Monday, but...
    Tonight, leaving a business meeting in San Marcos, I was detained by cops... i think....
    I don't know San Marcos that well, so I was on the feeder to I35, looking for my exit back to Bastrop.

    A car in front of me slammed on the brakes, so I checked my mirror and the left lane was clear, so I put on my blinker and changed lanes. The car that slammed its brakes got behind me and turned on the lights! So, I put my blinker on to indicate that I'm going back to the right lane. When I did, I turned on the hazzards to acknowledge the officer. That service road is very thin with LOTS of traffic. So, I went on till I found a Chick fil a parking lot. I pulled in, and found no exit other than the drive thru (and no where to park). I could not reverse, because there were 3 cop cars behind me! I looked u to see one cop cross my truck from passenger side to mine with his gun on me! Then I noticed two more in front, and at least two more behind me, all with guns leveled on me!

    Through the loud speaker, I was ordered out of my truck, had to walk backwards towards them with my hands behind me, when I got close I was cuffed and ut on my knees! I still had guns on me. did not have time to turn on my recording, so I didn't "run". I asked why I had guns on me. Only got more orders. I kept asking,''What did I do''. Finally, I said to one officer that 'I need probable cause, reasonable suspicion, something''. He said I was driving erratic.

    They took my wallet without my consent, searched it and found my license, looked through my truck without asking my consent, found an oen container ( yeah, my fuck up). They did a feild sobriety test (with armed cos in the shadows) and determined i was not intoxicated. (The officer said ''we have to do an eye test to prove you are intoxicated....i mean, not intoxicated). Finally after asking over and over why I was stopped, they said my registration has been out for almost a year. That is true....didnt see a reason to register something im not using for transortation. But they did not know that untill they stopped me! My first response was ''erratic driving'', which I did not know was a crime, even if it were true!

    Anyway, they finally let me go and gave me citations for oen container and no registration. He said he would give me 30 days instead of the standard 10 (his words) to appear since I complied so well (like I had any other fuckin choice!). I realize there is a lot left out,but where do I start? I'm thinking a PIR right away to get recordings of things I was not able to get. I also think the officer ''giving'' me more time is unlawful, as was the original stop. I also think that they did not have any evidence of ''expired registration'' untill AFTER THE STOP..... fruit of the poisionous tree?
    Thanks all!
    ==================================
    ==================================

    Tao Lauw: First let's deal with the open container:

    . . 1) Did they TAKE the container?

    . . 2) Did they photograph the container?

    . . 3) Did they TEST the contents to determine WHAT it contained, if anything?

    . . 4) DID it contain ANYTHING?

    . . 5) Did they POUR OUT the contents if it did contain anything?

    . . 6) WHERE is the container if the cops didn't take it?

    Get copies of the police reports, audio/video from cruisers, body cams and mics, computer aided-dispatch reports, audio recordings between the officers that were present and dispatch, and any other form of records, communications, or materials, regardless of form or manner of storage and retrieval.

    VERY IMPORTANT!! Get copies of the records showing WHEN the cops ran your information to determine that the truck was not registered. IF the time they ran your tags is AFTER the time your stop was initiated, and their reports say it was BEFORE the stop was initiated so as to provide them with reasonable suspicion/ probable cause, then we can PROVE the cop(s) falsified their reports to justify what THEN becomes an ILLEGAL STOP without either.

    There is ALSO the issue of the cop INTENTIONALLY endangering the public, and you specifically, by trying to cause an accident with the unnecessary and unexpected braking of his cruiser to force you to move to another lane. His dash cam should show the rapid deceleration of his cruiser even if there isn't any audio. That's entrapment. So make SURE that you get the video STARTING no less than 10 minutes PRIOR to your having to move over, and no less than 10 minutes AFTER the stop was concluded just in case they say something incriminating in the time right after you left the scene.

    Once that information is in your hands we can start finding more things to go after THEM with.

    ==================================
    ==================================

    Tao Lauw: Joe Cox - "They didn't take the container (a Lonestar beer can). I don't know whether or not they took pictures or tested the contents. It was about half full. They did pour it out. I found it on the back floorboard the next morning, still in the koozie. It was in the back seat cup holder when they found it."
    *===================*

    GREAT!!

    Well, FIRST thing is to file a Motion to Suppress relating to the "open container" for lack of evidence. They have no container, they have no video or photographs (most likely), and if they DO, they have no chemical analysis or taste test results to support the legal conclusion that it was alcohol of any kind (I'm guessing that neither of them actually TASTED it to determine the contents).

    You will ALSO file a Motion in Limine asking the court to order the prosecution AND the witnesses to never mention the alleged "open container" or the alleged contents that no one seems to have any actual evidence of.

    Then, if the court denies both of those (which they clearly should not if they actually play by the rules of evidence), let me show you EXACTLY how the cross-examination of ANY officer that takes the stand to testify to the "open container" should go.

    =====================================
    =====================================

    From this moment forward you will ALWAYS OBJECT to ANY mention of the open container by the prosecution citing lack of evidence.

    But, if they ARE allowed to ask ANY questions about it or the contents, THIS is how you cross-examine the cop and destroy their case.

    EVERY question is a "leading question," which is perfectly legal to do on cross-examination, and are the ONLY kinds of questions you should ask on cross-examination. You ARE literally putting words in the witnesses mouth and making them admit to them. DO THAT WELL, and you will win your case.

    =====================================
    =====================================

    You: You testified that your career has spanned XX years as a peace officer overall, yes or no?

    Officer: Yes.

    You: Officer, you have alleged that there was an "open container" in the automobile, yes or no?

    Officer: Yes.

    You: You do not have the alleged container here with you today, yes or no?

    Officer: No.

    You: You do not have any of the fluid contents that you say was inside of the alleged container, yes or no?

    Officer: No.

    You: You did not perform any chemical analysis tests of the fluid contents that you say were inside of the alleged container, yes or no?

    Officer: No.

    You: You did not taste the fluid contents you say was inside of the alleged container, yes or no?

    Officer: No.

    You: Then you do not know for certain if the contents of the alleged container was actually urine instead of alcohol, yes or no?

    Officer: No/ Maybe/ Possibly (only a real fucking idiot would say anything else at this point).

    You: You actually poured the unidentified liquid in the alleged container out onto the ground didn't you, yes or no?

    Officer: Yes.

    You: You actually threw away the alleged container didn't you, yes or no?

    Officer: Yes.

    You: You have conducted more than just a few of these "traffic' stops in your XX year career, yes or no?

    Officer: Yes.

    You: You have discovered drugs on some of the ‘traffic’ stops you've conducted in your career, yes or no?

    =========================================
    =========================================

    The prosecutor might attempt to object to relevance. Just respond with:

    "Goes to prior testimony, evidence, chain of custody, and to the veracity and character of the witness judge."

    The judge SHOULD say “Overruled.”

    =========================================
    =========================================

    Officer: Yes.

    You: When you find drugs, those drugs would be considered evidence of a crime wouldn't they, yes or no?

    Officer: Yes.

    You: And you’re required to protect that evidence, yes or no?

    Officer: Yes.

    You: You’re required to not to tamper with or destroy such evidence in any way, yes or no?

    Officer: Yes.

    You: If you took some portion of those drugs and kept them for yourself, or threw that portion away, would that be considered tampering with or destroying evidence, yes or no?

    Officer: Yes.

    You: As a peace officer, you know that fabricating, tampering with, or destroying evidence is actually a 3rd Degree felony offense in Texas under Sec. 37.09 of the Texas Penal Code, yes or no?

    Officer: Yes.

    You: And yet, you just testified in open court that you poured out the liquid contents of the alleged open container, then you disposed of the alleged container, both of which constitute evidence of a crime. Doesn't that actually prove that YOU tampered with and destroyed physical evidence relevant to this case, yes or no?

    Officer: I want my fucking lawyer!!!

    ================================

    Use this in good health, and may the evidence and force of law be with you.
     
    Mujahideen and arminius like this.
  2. michael59

    michael59 heads up-butts down Site Supporter ++ Platinum Bling

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2014
    Messages:
    6,553
    Likes Received:
    3,006
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    20 years logging
    Location:
    on the low side of corporate Oregon
    Cool Beans.

    Went to the local market and picked up a sixer. There was a county Mountie inside and he left right after I put the sixer on the counter. Of course he pulls out right as I leave the store. He gets in the turn lane and I pull in right behind him because I am turning also. And as/after we both turn he puts on his right blinker and pulls over and I pass him. He pulls out and gets on my tail.

    So I can understand the story I really can but I doubt I could pull of a cross like that.
     
  3. Goldhedge

    Goldhedge Moderator Site Mgr Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2010
    Messages:
    28,742
    Likes Received:
    32,852
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Planet Earth
    ^ practice AND you can read it out loud one question at a time!
     
  4. michael59

    michael59 heads up-butts down Site Supporter ++ Platinum Bling

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2014
    Messages:
    6,553
    Likes Received:
    3,006
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    20 years logging
    Location:
    on the low side of corporate Oregon
    No I was speaking to the leading questions. That vid that was up yesterday about a banker being crossed was the same as this written cross. Thing about the mortgage and the banker cross is I know the lawyer asked the same questions over and over but they all seemed just a little different. It is the subtleties in the cross I was getting at.
     

Share This Page