Chapter 13 Questions

Questions should be SHORT.

Each question should seek one fact at a time.

Only one.

Each question should be one question, not multiples of questions rolled into one long sentence.

One question seeking one fact.

‘What is the make of your car?’

‘What colour is it?’

‘Is there any damage to its front?’

Not,

‘Tell us about your car, for example its make, its colour, whether it has any damage to its front?’

One question seeking one fact.

In examination in chief.

And cross-examination.

Both.

Always.

The big problem is that multiple questions create a list in the mind of the witness, who is probably ill at ease anyway, can’t then remember the list and will answer only one or two aspects of what has been asked, and possibly wander off script.

If you ask long multiple questions, you will look clumsy, you will confuse the witness, and you will undermine the credibility of both of you.

KNOW THE QUESTION BEFORE YOU ASK IT.

Don't set off in the expectation you will know what you want to say, as yours may be a long and clumsy voyage.

And not knowing exactly what you want to ask will usually lead to the urrrm ehhh distraction.

The urrrm ehhh distraction is where questions are proceeded with ‘Urrrm Ehhh'. Ask your colleagues whether you do this, as you are almost certain not to be aware of it.

Video yourself and check there.

If you are a member of the Urmm Ehhh brigade, here's a hopefully helpful hint: - make yourself conscious of exhaling slightly and quietly before each question. This will definitely kill it off.

Another hint is to concentrate before each question on wriggling your toes. I’ve mentioned this before, as it stops fiddling. It cannot be seen. And the effort involved in wriggling them occupies your mind so much that you forget to do the Urmm Ehhh thing.

Urmm Ehhh is a fill-in.

DON'T BE EMBARRASSED BY SILENCE.

Relish it. Use it to create tension. Use it to create command. Don't hide from it. All eyes are focused on you for your next question. So let them focus on you - stand like a rock and relish your control.

The other fill-in distractions are : ‘Right’

OK’

‘And’

‘So’.

Don't do this. Please!

Advocates sometimes say Right or OK in response to each answer. Again, you are unlikely to be conscious of it, so ask your colleagues. Or check the video.

The problem with Right and OK, aside from being irritating like Urmm Ehhh, is that it also suggests you are approving of the witness, and that you are signalling the correct answers to the witness. This has the effect of undermining the witness's credibility, and of course yours, because it may look as if you are telling the witness what should be said.

As for And, it connects you to your next question, and is just plain irritating, so that the listener starts listening out for its repetition, almost making a game of it, just listening for the next ‘and’, and is not listening to the question and answer.

As for So, this is like ‘and’, as in the mind of the advocate, it connects to the next question, but unlike ‘and’, it tends to suggest to a witness that there is ought to be conclusion coming, as ‘so’ is like ‘therefore’, and of course there isn’t a conclusion invited, it is just a fill-in, and it therefore often causes confusion to the witness.

Yet another fill-in is the repeated answer.

Advocates sometimes idly repeat the answer just given to fill in thinking space before the next question.

It is the most irritating thing you can do.

And it completely undermines your credibility as it makes you look as if you are over-emphasising the evidence.

With any luck, the judge will stop you.

However, do not confuse the idle repetition of the answer with DELIBERATE REPETITION.

A deliberate repetition is where you repeat an answer which has been really devastating against the opposition.

Repeat it slowly.

Let it hang in the air.

Look to the tribunal for good measure.

And only do it once or twice with a witness or you'll be written off as a drama freak.

So, to nail this down, I’ll say it again:

Fill-ins are:

Urrrm ehhh

Right

Ok

And

So

The idly repeated answer

And what happens with fill-ins is that the tribunal begins to listen out for them, and stops listening to the substance of the evidence, smiling inwardly at every time you do it again, thinking you are a buffoon.

You can’t be persuasive if they think you are a buffoon.

Fill-ins are difficult to control. But you must make yourself aware of them.

Like I say, try the short exhale. Or the toes.

Whatever. Just don't do it