(4)6.6.2 Cross-Examination

(a) Purpose.

Cross-examination is conducted to:

• test the credibility, reliability, and accuracy of the witness;
• clarify, challenge, or qualify testimony elicited during direct examination; and
• highlight inconsistencies, biases, or omissions in witness statements.

(b) Conduct.

Counsel shall:

• ask questions in a clear, sequential, and non-argumentative manner;
• remain within the scope of topics covered during direct examination, unless the court grants permission to expand;
• avoid harassing, intimidating, or badgering the witness;
• ensure all questions are designed to elicit factual answers rather than speculative or leading conclusions beyond the witness’s knowledge; and
• comply with evidentiary rules, including relevance, authentication, privilege, and admissibility as outlined in Chapter 5.

(c) Scope and Limitations.

• Questions may probe for inconsistencies between prior statements and current testimony.
• Counsel may explore potential biases, interests, or relationships that may affect the witness’s credibility.
• Leading questions are generally permitted during cross-examination, provided they do not introduce new, irrelevant, or prejudicial information.
• Counsel may use exhibits, prior reports, or recorded statements to challenge testimony, subject to proper authentication and court approval.

(d) Judicial Oversight.

The court may:

1. intervene to prevent improper questioning, including harassment, irrelevance, or leading beyond scope limitations;
2. provide curative instructions to the jury if improper conduct occurs; and
3. impose sanctions or admonishments on counsel violating rules of procedure or ethics.

(e) Special Considerations for Expert Witnesses.

• Cross-examination of experts may address methodology, qualifications, assumptions, or conclusions.
• Counsel may challenge expert opinions by comparison to recognized standards, literature, or contrary evidence, ensuring relevance and fairness.
• Expert cross-examination shall not extend to personal beliefs unrelated to the expert’s field or the matters at issue.