Home
Search results “Cross examining a defendant has ppls”
Accused Rapist Cross-Examines Alleged Victim
 
05:27
Florida man accused of sexual assault represents himself in court. For more, click here: http://abcnews.go.com/US/accused-rapist-cross-examines-alleged-victim-florida-courtroom/story?id=12600166
Views: 58536 ABC News
Defense witness: Don't put words in my mouth
 
05:40
Looks like one of the defense's final witnesses wasn't ready to play nice with prosecutor David Walgren. During an intense cross examination Thursday, Dr. Robert Waldman accused Walgren of putting words in his mouth. The judge stepped in and told Dr. Waldman that that's how cross examinations usually work.Walgren asked the judge to strike several of Dr. Waldman's responses because he was being "unresponsive." When Walgren asked Dr. Waldman how many hours each week he did dialysis work, it took the doctor about a minute and a half of back and forth before he could explain. For more informaton please visit http://www.hlntv.com/video/2011/10/27/defense-witness-waldman-spars-prosecutor
Views: 1852696 HLN
4wh33ls v. PatrioticLaw - Defendant Cross Examination (Part 4/6) - Roblox: Firestone Judicial Center
 
05:33
Part 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDTNMvBbqKU&ab_channel=RedWhiteandPew Part 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Boutqd4len4&ab_channel=RedWhiteandPew Part 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmZpL-MDQsc&ab_channel=RedWhiteandPew Part 4: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pM22zuPL3HA&ab_channel=RedWhiteandPew Part 5: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uh7JaBqOh-c&ab_channel=RedWhiteandPew Part 6: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s21npmv1xmc&ab_channel=RedWhiteandPew
Views: 386 RedWhiteandPew
Preparing for Questioning by a Judge in Custody Court
 
04:13
http://www.commandthecourtroom.com It is imperative that you are prepared for custody court and research how to answer questions the judge will ask you.* Please read the Disclaimer below: *This video recording is for educational purposes only and should not be considered as the rendering of legal advice. The viewing of this recording does not create an attorney-client relationship. An attorney-client relationship is only formed when you have signed an engagement agreement. We cannot guarantee results. Past results do not guarantee future results. Consult with a licensed attorney for information regarding the specifics of your case. I will demonstrate this by a story have a story to tell you about my daughter Paloma, and it does relate to the family law courtroom but you are going to have to wait till the end to find out. Paloma is really enjoying ham and cheese burrito right now which is one of my favorites. Before that her favorite was peanut butter and jelly. So what she is used to me doing is making the burrito and cutting it in half and putting it into her lunch. The other day I wanted to eat half a burrito for myself so I rolled out the tortilla and cut it in half. So she came in and she wanted a half a burrito too, so this time I was making the burrito differently and making each half burrito separately. Instead of making the whole burrito and cutting it in half, so I was making it one half at a time since I had already cut the tortilla. Well Paloma saw me making the burrito this way and completely had a meltdown and freaked out because I was not making the burrito the way she liked it…the way I made it before. And this time she wanted a whole burrito. So to calm her down I made another whole burrito and gave it to her. But she said ‘No Mommy, I want you to cut it in half, which made no sense to me since I had already made a half burrito before and now she wants this half burrito. So, “Things are always how you slice them” And it’s the same thing to a 5-year old as it is to a judge in the courtroom during a divorce or custody hearing. If you don’t know what a judge wants or expects then you won’t know how to present what the judge wants or what they expect at your hearing. So you won’t be able to slice your case like the judge wants to see it. This could lead to devastating results for you in the courtroom. When people represent themselves in a divorce it’s really important to know what the judge expects. Here are ways to find out. -Go for a Test Drive with the Judge. Go see him in action. When he has a divorce or custody trial go sit in at the hearing. Find out what his quirks or idiosyncrasies and what he likes to hear from the parties. -what questions does the judge ask you? -In some states, like Arizona, there is a website where sometimes judges will actually put on there what they want, what they don’t want, what you should do and the rules of the courtroom. If you find this in your state then heed what the judge says and follow the rules. If the judge says you need to create a pre-trial statement with x, y and z then definitely prepare that pre-trial statement on time and include every single thing the judge wants you to include. Be prepared when you go into the courtroom. Know what to expect, know what the judge is looking for, the questions the judge will ask, be prepared for your divorce or custody hearing and know how the judge wants and how you should deliver. Things will go much better for you if you know how to slice things the way the judge wants you to. Wendy Hernandez is a family law attorney in Phoenix, AZ and founder of Command the Courtroom which teaches you how to handle yourself in court and achieve the best outcome when representing yourself in your divorce or child custody case. Download my FREE ‘Child’s Best Interest Checklist’ at http://www.commandthecourtroom.com Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/commandthecourtroom Web: http://www.commandthecourtroom.com My Law Firm: http://www.hernandezfirm.com
Views: 13304 Command the Courtroom
Cross-examination of accuser (Christina DePamphilis v. Paul Maravelias)
 
03:38:24
[David DePamphilis's daughter] vs. Paul Maravelias 5/3/18 and 5/4/18 http://davidtheliar.com/MaraveliasMotionForReconsideration.pdf http://davidtheliar.com/MaraveliasObjection.pdf Christina DePamphilis v. Paul Maravelias (473-2016-CV-124) Derry District Court - Derry, NH Simon R. Brown representing accuser
Views: 594 NH Outrage
What Is A Cross Examination In Court?
 
00:47
When the lawyer for plaintiff or government has finished questioning a witness, defendant may then cross examine examination is used to question hostile witnesses during depositions and in both civil criminal trials. Following cross examination of the witness, plaintiff's attorney has an opportunity to ask witness 19 mar 2017 rape victims will be spared ordeal giving evidence in court under reforms being brought forward by government. Cross examination legal definition of cross examinationcross how courts work what is examination? Cross dictionary a brief summary inbrief. This is not an lawyers in both civil and criminal trials use direct cross examination. Rape victims will no longer face cross examination in court with rape to be spared ordeal of governing prnciples law teacherwhat you should know about direct and. Cross examination legal definition of cross examination in the dictionary by free online english and encyclopedia. Canadian criminal trial advocacy cross examination wikibooks. 100 cross examination is a feature of the adversarial process and is designed, among other things, to allow the defence to confront and undermine the featured law firms in mountain view, ca change location the attorney may ask leading questions during cross examination. Crime), and a lawyer for the prosecution, representing people whose law (law) close questioning of hostile witness in court to discredit or throw new light on testimony already provided direct examination law[edit]. If you ask, the court must recess definition of cross examination term used when a witness is examined by opposing party in suit before 24 nov 2015 1904 francis wellman published what regarded as seminal work on examination, entitled art 28. Alrc australian law reform commission. Direct and cross examination of witnesses lawyers. See canadian criminal evidence testimonial. Cross examination legal definition of cross examinationcross how courts work what is examination? dictionary a brief summary inbrief. What is what does cross examination mean in law? . Justice secretary 19 mar 2017 new measures to spare alleged rape victims from facing live cross examination in court will be rolled out as part of changes being made by the principles governing operation may bifurcated two heads this essay has been submitted a law student. Cross examination dictionary definition vocabulary. Definition from nolo's plain english law dictionary 19 jun 2015 if you are representing yourself in a supreme court trial, may for example, cross examination, can ask leading questions and as the examiner, entitled to have reasonable amount of time examine witness statement that is disclosed. The opposing cross examination is the questioning of a witness at trial or hearing by party who called to testify. Cross examination? Black's law dictionarycross examination. Lii sample questions to ask when cross examining witnesses at a examination in criminal cases defense homestead. Cross examination is usually more f
Views: 420 Obu Obu
How to Prove a Witness has Lied at Trial - Attorney Nicholas Warywoda of Parker Waichman Explains
 
03:39
How to Prove a Witness has Lied at Trial - Attorney Nicholas Warywoda of Parker Waichman explains more at: https://www.yourlawyer.com/why-trust-us-with-your-case/we-take-care-of-everything/ Watch as Florida attorney Nicholas Warywoda of Parker Waichman talks about what he does as an attorney when a witness lies on stand during trial. In most cases, someone is going to lie. They do not want to be held responsible and liable for something they did, so people lie. That is why we come to court to prove our cases. We start by questioning all the witnesses in deposition. As we ask these same questions during trial, we can show that the answers are different. So instead of calling out the person as a liar, we show that they did give a contrasting statement to which they had previously given. Their lie is now exposed and the jury will begin to show in your favor. Watch this video now to learn more. If you have additional questions, I want you to call me at (239) 390-1000. I welcome your call. Visit our website where you can view more videos and media content from our law firm. Parker Waichman LLP 27300 Riverview Center Blvd Bonita Springs, FL 34134 (239) 390-1000 https://www.yourlawyer.com/florida/
Views: 11927 Parker Waichman
Cross Examination for Trial: Paid Testifier Barry Jeffries
 
04:19
Defense lawyers and insurance companies sometimes hire paid testifiers to attempt to convince a jury that the plaintiff was not really hurt or was hurt by some cause other than that wreck that actually caused the injury. When the defense tries that tactic, we unmask the truth.
Views: 270 Butler Tobin
The Negotiation and Some Tolerance
 
06:54
Vicente has come to negotiate and then the Judge feels like the police showed some tolerance to a defendant. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These are real people, not actors. Please keep that in mind when you comment. They don't deserve negative scrutiny. Thank you. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Caught in Providence airs on television weekdays, please visit www.caughtinprovidence.com/showtimes for local listings. SUBSCRIBE AND FOLLOW: Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/caughtinprovidence/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/caughtinprov Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/caughtinprovidence/ Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/CaughtinProvidence/ Contact us for sponsorship opportunities! https://www.caughtinprovidence.com/ Produced by Sociable! https://www.trendsociably.com https://www.facebook.com/trendsociably
Views: 21107 Caught In Providence
Vinay Nayak NHSMT 2009 -- Cross Examination of the Defendant
 
09:25
Vinay Nayak, Hinsdale Central student, cross examines Ashley Dougherty, the Defendant on trial for murder. Illinois placed 4th at the championship. Illinois vs. Arizona, Round I -- National High School Mock Trial, Atlanta Georgia.
Views: 5691 IllinoisMockTrial
Ace Attorney: All Cross-Examination Themes 2016 (Reupload)
 
41:56
01) 0:00 Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney - Cross-Examination ~ Moderato 2001​ ​02) 1:40 Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney - Cross-Examination ~ Allegro 2001​ ​03) 3:25 Phoenix Wright: Justice for All - Cross-Examination ~ Moderato 2002 ​04) 5:10 Phoenix Wright: Justice for All - Cross-Examination ~ Allegro 2002 ​05) 6:55 Phoenix Wright: Trials and Tribulations - Cross-Examination ~ Moderato 2004 06) 8:40 Phoenix Wright: Trials and Tribulations - Cross-Examination ~ Allegro 2004 07) 10:25 Apollo Justice: Ace Attorney - Cross-Examination ~ Moderato 2007 08) 12:10 Apollo Justice: Ace Attorney - Cross-Examination ~ Allegro 2007 09) 13:55 Ace Attorney Investigations: Miles Edgeworth - Confrontation ~ Moderato 2009 10) 15:40 Ace Attorney Investigations: Miles Edgeworth - Confrontation ~ Allegro 2009 11) 17:25 Ace Attorney Investigations: Miles Edgeworth - Confrontation ~ Presto 2009 12) 19:10 Gyakuten Kenji 2 - Confrontation ~ Moderato 2011 13) 20:55 Gyakuten Kenji 2 - Confrontation ~ Allegro 2011 14) 22:40 Gyakuten Kenji 2 - Confrontation ~ Presto 2011 15) 24:25 Professor Layton vs Phoenix Wright - Cross-Examination ~ Moderato 2012 (English Court) 16) 26:10 Professor Layton vs Phoenix Wright - Cross-Examination ~ Allegro 2012 (English Court) 17) 27:55 Professor Layton vs Phoenix Wright - Mob Cross-Examination ~ Moderato 2012 18) 29:40 Professor Layton vs Phoenix Wright - Mob Cross-Examination ~ Allegro 2012 19) 31:25 Phoenix Wright: Dual Destinies - Cross-Examination ~ Moderato 2013 20) 33:10 Phoenix Wright: Dual Destinies - Cross-Examination ~ Allegro 2013 21) 34:55 Dai Gyakuten Saiban: Naruhodō Ryūnosuke no Bōken - The Great Cross-Examination ~ Moderato 2015 22) 36:40 Dai Gyakuten Saiban: Naruhodō Ryūnosuke no Bōken - The Great Cross-Examination ~ Allegro 2015 23) 38:25 Phoenix Wright: Spirit of Justice - Cross-Examination ~ Moderato 2016 24) 40:10 Phoenix Wright: Spirit of Justice - Cross-Examination ~ Allegro 2016 Developer(s): Capcom Publisher(s): Capcom
Views: 243969 169Tom
Toxicologist Cross Examination One
 
09:56
Cross Examination of People's Expert Toxicologist regarding the effects of Marijuana on driving
Views: 3935 Jim Amberg
Do You Cross-Examine a Child the Same Way You Would Cross-Examine a Medical Expert
 
03:20
Do You Cross-Examine a Child the Same Way You Would Cross-Examine a Medical Expert at Trial? http://www.Oginski-Law.com/ NY Medical Malpractice & Personal Injury Trial Lawyer Gerry Oginski explains 516-487-8207 Email: [email protected] There are instances when a child will need to testify in a civil lawsuit in a car accident case or a medical malpractice case or even in a wrongful death case here in NY. When the attorney who calls the child to the witness stand is done questioning him or her, what type of approach is best for the lawyer who must now cross examine this child? One key factor will be the child's age. A more important question is whether the opposing attorney should even bother to get up and cross examine the child, especially a very young child. If the child is a teenager and has testified about something that could be damaging, then it might be critical to conduct a detailed and thorough cross-examination. Keep in mind, contrary to many TV shows and movies, cross examination should not be considered “Angry examination.” TV shows and movies portray cross examination as the culmination of getting an opposing witness to say something damaging that destroys their case. While that makes for great drama, that rarely happens in real life. An attorney who chooses to attack a young child on the witness stand is opening himself up to have his client's case destroyed because the jury will not appreciate attacking a young child during cross examination. Watch the video to learn more... Here's a cardiac malpractice case where I was able to achieve a $6 million dollar settlement for my client: http://www.oginski-law.com/video/cardiac-malpractice-in-ny.cfm Here's a foot surgery case where a Westchester, NY jury awarded my client $1.55 million dollars for her pain and suffering: http://ow.ly/azKg6 To learn more about how medical malpractice cases work in the state of New York, I encourage you to explore my educational website, ‪http://www.Oginski-Law.com‬. If you have legal questions, I invite you to pick up the phone and call me at 516-487-8207 or by email at [email protected] This is what I do every day and I'd be happy to chat with you. Law Office of Gerald Oginski 25 Great Neck Road, Ste. 4 Great Neck, NY 11021 516-487-8207 Email: [email protected]
Views: 332 Gerry Oginski
NY Lawsuits; 3 Questions Never To Ask on Cross-Examination; Trial Attorney Gerry Oginski Explains
 
03:52
http://www.Oginski-Law.com In an accident case, medical malpractice case or wrongful death case in New York that goes to trial, I have an opportunity to cross-examine witnesses who are called by the defense as well as the people you have sued. Questioning a witness or party to a lawsuit is an important part of the trial process. It gives each side an opportunity to evaluate the witness, evaluate their credibility and learn exactly what happened and why. If done correctly, cross-examination can establish liability and show the jury just where the witness is incorrect or how their conclusions may not be as accurate as they were on direct examination. However, there are certain types of questions an attorney should not ask during the cross-examination. Come join me as I share with you what three types of questions they are. Watch the video to learn more... Here's a cardiac malpractice case where I was able to achieve a $6 million dollar settlement for my client: http://www.oginski-law.com/video/cardiac-malpractice-in-ny.cfm Here's a foot surgery case where a Westchester, NY jury awarded my client $1.55 million dollars for her pain and suffering: http://ow.ly/azKg6 To learn more about how medical malpractice cases work in the state of New York, I encourage you to explore my educational website, ‪http://www.Oginski-Law.com‬. If you have legal questions, I invite you to pick up the phone and call me at 516-487-8207 or by email at [email protected] This is what I do every day and I'd be happy to chat with you. Law Office of Gerald Oginski 25 Great Neck Road, Ste. 4 Great Neck, NY 11021 516-487-8207 Email: [email protected] Twitter: @GerryOginski
Views: 896 Gerry Oginski
LawAccess NSW - The hearing: Cross-examining a witness
 
04:20
Are you going to a hearing after pleading not guilty? This video provides information about going to court for a defended hearing and cross-examining a witness. You should not: - ask questions that require an explanation (open ended questions) - make statements about the evidence of the witness while they are still in the witness box - ask a question a second time because you didn't get the answer you wanted the first time. This video is for people in New South Wales, Australia. For more information, go to http://www.lawaccess.nsw.gov.au
Views: 12180 JusticeNSW
Can Recorded Testimony Be Used in Court? | Crawford v. Washington
 
05:03
Want a specific SCOTUS case covered? Your idea gets picked when you donate on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/iammrbeat Mr. Beat's band: http://electricneedleroom.net/ Mr. Beat on Twitter: https://twitter.com/beatmastermatt In episode 25 of Supreme Court Briefs, a man stabs another man, but calls it self-defense. However, the only witness can't testify in court, so they use her recorded police interrogation instead. Wait a second, CAN THEY DO THAT?!? Produced by Matt Beat. Music by Electric Needle Room (Matt Beat). All images found in public domain or used under fair use guidelines. Computer error sound effect by Mike Koenig Photo by Lwp Kommunikacio https://www.flickr.com/photos/lwpkommunikacio/13774906804 Check out cool primary sources here: https://www.oyez.org/cases/2003/02-9410 Other sources used: https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-9410.ZO.html https://www.theconstitutionproject.com/portfolio/the-confrontation-clause/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crawford_v._Washington http://federalevidence.com/pdf/2007/13-SCt/Crawford_v._Washington.pdf https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/541/36/ Olympia, Washington August 5, 1999 Sylvia Crawford tells her husband, Michael Crawford, that a man named Kenneth Lee had attempted to rape her. Michael Crawford, who had been heavily drinking some alcohol, does not go to the police to report this. Instead, the very angry and very drunk Crawford goes to Kenneth Lee’s apartment. Crawford and Lee get into a fight, and the next thing you know Crawford is stabbing Lee in the stomach. During the stabbing, Crawford’s hand also got cut. After the police did get involved, they arrested both Michael and Sylvia Crawford and interrogated them separately. Michael and Sylvia gave similar accounts of what happened, but there was one important difference. Michael claimed he had stabbed Kenneth out of self-defence, but Sylvia said Kenneth did not have a weapon. This would cause the police to question Michael’s story. How could it be self-defence if Kenneth didn’t even have a weapon? The State of Washington charged Michael Crawford with assault and attempted murder. State law said people married didn’t have to testify against each other in court, so at Michael’s trial, Sylvia didn’t take the stand. However, the police had recorded her interrogation, and the judge allowed the deputy prosecutor, Robert Lund, to use that tape as evidence that Michael was attempting murder, not acting in self-defense. Crawford’s lawyers were like, “hold up man, you can’t use that tape!” They said Mrs. Crawford’s recorded statements couldn’t be used as evidence unless they were able to cross examine her, which, as I previously said, under state law they couldn’t. The defense argued this went against the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment. Crawford had a right to confront his accuser in court, and you can’t cross examine a recording of a voice. Believe me, I have tried. I yell at my own voice recordings all the time. But nevertheless, the recording was still used as evidence, and influential evidence at that. The State convicted Crawford of attempted murder and assault and sentenced him to about 15 years in prison. However, the Washington Court of Appeals overturned the decision, arguing that, due to the precedent set by the Supreme Court case Ohio v. Roberts, Sylvia Crawford’s recorded testimony was not reliable enough. Ohio v. Roberts also dealt with the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment and set up this reliability standard. However, the Washington Supreme Court overturned the Washington Court of Appeals decision and said that Sylvia’s recorded testimony was reliable because it complemented Michael’s testimony well. So they reinstated his conviction. Goodness, all these different interpretations of the same evidence. That never happens! The Supreme Court was like, “we want in on this action,” and requested to review the case on June 9, 2003. On November 10 that same year, they heard oral arguments. The big question for this case was, “Does using testimony from out of the court, with no chance for cross-examination, go against the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment?” The court said “yes, why yes it does.” On March 8, 2004, the ruled in favor of Crawford, 9-0. Yep, it was unanimous. The Court argued that Sylvia Crawford’s recorded statement from the police interrogation violated Michael Crawford’s Sixth Amendment right to confront her about it in court. Justice Antonin Scalia gave the opinion. He argued that any out-of court statement that is “testimonial” should not be allowed as evidence, unless this statement came from a person who had no way of testifying in court AND this person could be cross-examined by the defendant ahead of time. Crawford v. Washington overturned Ohio v. Roberts. It made it much more difficult to allow “hearsay” evidence to be used in court.
Views: 7277 Mr. Beat
Court drama during cross examination of double murder victims father
 
09:48
Dale Linder Sr. and Attorney Michael Duff clash during a hearing in Lorain Municipal Court. Linder's two sons were allegedly killed by their cousin Donna Brown. The defense is claiming she was tormented by the men for being a lesbian and that she was pistol whipped by one of them the night before before the shooting.
Views: 705270 The Chronicle Telegram
Defendant's mouthing words in court stops trial
 
02:30
What the defendant in a murder trial was mouthing in court stopped his trial in its tracks. ◂ WXYZ 7 Action News is metro Detroit's leading source for breaking news, weather warnings, award-winning investigative reports, sports and entertainment. WXYZ 7 Action News is Detroit's breaking news and weather leader. Channel 7 - on-air, online at WXYZ.com and always Taking Action for You. For more download the WXYZ mobile app: iPhone: http://bit.ly/iOS-wxyz Android: http://bit.ly/wxyzplay
Lying cop owned by judge who throws out the case !
 
02:09
A video of Judge Frederic Schott becoming angry with a prosecutor during a hearing in Seminole County. The exchange between Schott and Assistant State Attorney Diana Miers happened on March 11 and was captured on courtroom video. A jury had just found a woman guilty of driving under the influence when the attorneys and judge started discussing the woman's license suspension. The Sanford police officer who made the arrest caused the defendant to lose her driver's license for a few months because of a mistake on the arrest paperwork. "Are you going to nolle pros that case? Or am I going to get mad at you today?" Schott asked. The judge and Miers got into a heated argument because he wanted the police officer to be charged with lying. "I want you taking him up on perjury," Schott said. "He admitted it was a mistake, your honor," Miers said. After the exchange, Schott decided to reverse the jury's verdict to not guilty. "This whole case was fishy," Schott said. Miers tried to argue against Schott's dismissal of the case but he didn't agree. "This is again evidence, direct evidence, and not circumstantial evidence," Miers said. legal analyst Belvin Perry, former chief judge for Orange and Osceola counties, was surprised to see Schott's behavior in court. "That is a very poor example of judicial temperament that judges are supposed to display," Perry said. "He should've counted to 10 and kept quiet." Officials told Eyewitness News that as a result of the incident, Schott will soon only be presiding over civil cases.
Views: 3235869 Green Mask Media
Mock Trial Step-by-Step: Cross Examination
 
04:13
(c) 2012, Ontario Justice Education Network
Views: 23412 OJEN ROEJ
How to Give Testimony on a Witness Stand
 
01:50
Watch more How to Understand Legal Issues videos: http://www.howcast.com/videos/424410-How-to-Give-Testimony-on-a-Witness-Stand Witnesses are often nervous about testifying on the witness stand and can look foolish, dishonest, or confused. Do yourself a favor and give your testimony by making yourself aware of the possible pitfalls. Step 1: Make a good impression Dress conservatively, with a minimum of jewelry and accessories. Tone down your hairstyle and makeup when you give testimony. Despite our resistance to the idea, appearances sway opinions. Tip Witnesses are often reluctant to take time to think because of the assumption that jurors will suspect they are hedging or lying. Step 2: Answer truthfully, listen closely Tell the truth, but only answer the questions that are asked. Don't elaborate unless you're asked to do so. Listen closely and be sure you understand the question; don't rush to answer. Request a rephrasing of the question if you're confused. Step 3: Avoid looking at your attorney Maintain eye contact with the attorney addressing you and don't appeal to or look at your own attorney or anyone else in the courtroom, which can give the impression that you doubt your account of the facts. Step 4: Stick to the facts Stick to the facts as you know them, rather than offering a guess, which can reflect on your story and eventually destroy your credibility. Step 5: Use clear body language Maintain an even emotional keel. Sit up, and be attentive, direct, and strong. Be relaxed enough to avoid showing aggravation. Did You Know? In 2010, a Detroit woman was removed from a jury and fined for posting a comment on Facebook declaring a defendant guilty.
Views: 26843 Howcast
How I cross examine policemen in court (cops) pt 1
 
10:48
Show your appreciation by donating now. You have said that you really appreciate what I do, I am asking you to express it with an act of donations. No one can do everything but everyone can do something, you can make a difference in helping to spread this truth. For years now I have provided information for educational proposes that Lawyers would charge you thousands of dollars for, yet I provide it for free. This information has helped you to get out of dishonor and avoid jail. You know who you are. I have put out of videos that have help many to discover the truth. I am asking you to donate as you will be assisting in spreading this truth, by helping to cover the cost of recording equipment and software, and assist us in our mission to help feed the Lost Sheep, the homeless and helpless. Small acts when multiplied by millions of people can change the world. Pulling someone down will never help you reach the top. Once you learn, teach others; once you receive give! You have never really lived until you have done something for someone that cannot repay you. Donate: https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=9S3FVBKYEY86W 347-618-1783 NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL IS NOTICE TO AGENT - NOTICE TO AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL If you are, or are affiliated with: a Monarchy/Government/Officer/Agency/Employee, foreign or domestic, CFR, UN, the BAR, the Vatican, The Rothschilds/The Rockefellers/J.P. Morgan Chase/ The Warburgs, the IMF, World Bank, and or The Press or in any way affiliated and or in concert with any of the above, the following pertains to you: NOTICE If you read/ watch any of the contents of The Mighty Sovereign video, you agree to pay a user fee of $325,000.00US payable in gold or silver coin, per hour or any fraction thereof, tracked by your IP address. Additionally, If you use any of the items, context or images from My Private Audio website, you agree to pay a user fee of $125,000.00US per use, payable in gold or silver coin, per image or paragraph. Get 3 items for only $350,000.00US, payable in gold or silver coin. IN ADDITION: Imaging any web pages, partial or whole, you agree to pay a per capture fee of $325,000.00US, payable in gold or silver coin. By your use, we mutually agree to this binding contract. All use fees are immediately due and payable upon demand to Angela Stark Contact: Tazadawak [email protected]
Views: 35458 DeprogramedEnlightener
Michelle Carter Trial – The Prosecutor Relentless Cross Examination Of The Defense Witness
 
04:02
Michelle Carter Trial – The Prosecutor Relentless Cross Examination Of The Defense Witness -~-~~-~~~-~~-~- Please watch: "What The 10% Won’t Tell You About King Solomon’s Temple" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ln0b_bUswPQ -~-~~-~~~-~~-~-
Views: 227 Max V World
CROSS EXAMINATION: Over Emphasis on the "Abnormal" by Dr. Lorandos
 
08:41
http://www.falsely-accused.net/ Dr. Lorandos cross exam demonstrates an over emphasis on the abnormal LORANDOS: Doctor, you would agree that mental health professionals do not know a lot of normal, well-adjusted people, correct? Witness: Youre speaking professionally? LORANDOS: Yes. Witness: Correct. LORANDOS: Your waiting room is not normally cluttered with normal people who are well-adjusted, correct? Witness: No, that is correct. LORANDOS: Because when all is said and done, normal, well-adjusted, people dont need your services, correct? Witness: Correct. LORANDOS: In your practice, than, you are exposed to maladjustment and psychopathology much more often than to normal, well-adjusted people, correct? Witness: Correct. LORANDOS: Being normal and well-adjusted involves much more than merely an absence of maladjustment and psychopathology, correct? Witness: Correct, thats right. LORANDOS: Now, the Journal of Clinical and Consulting Psychology is a generally recognized and accepted peer review journal in your field, correct? Witness: Yes. LORANDOS: And a 1976 article by Garner and Smith published in the Journal of Clinical and Consulting Psychology entitled, An Experimental Videotape Evaluating Trainee Approaches to Clinical Judging, might be relevant to your opinions in this case, correct? Witness: Could be, yes. LORANDOS: Now concerning this research, Id like to ask you this hypothetical question which involves five steps. 1) A group of mental health professionals and a group of undergraduate college students observed 1-minute video tape segments of ten different children. 2) 5 of the children were intellectually normal and 5 of the children were intellectually impaired, or developmentally delayed. 3) The observers were asked to estimate the level of intellectual functioning for each child. 4) Compared to the college students, the mental health professionals made less accurate estimates of the intellectual functioning of the normal children. 5) Compared to the college students, the professionals reported lower estimates of the intellectual functioning of the normal children. Now my question; this 1976 article demonstrates that because mental health professionals see cases of maladjustment and psychopathology so frequently, they underestimate the strengths of normal populations, correct? Witness: Well that appears to be the case in that particular article. LORANDOS: Thank you. You have not published anything in a peer review journal necessitating that we reconsider the 1976 findings of Garner and Smith, correct? Witness: No. LORANDOS: And you cannot cite any data published in a peer review journal necessitating that we reconsider the 1976 findings of Garner and Smith, correct? Witness: Well, were talking about the behaviors of other LORANDOS: Doctor, you cannot cite anything published in a peer review journal necessitating that we reevaluate the findings of Garner and Witness: What you dont understand is there are many studies published in peer review journals that LORANDOS: Your honor, would you direct the witness to answer the question asked? Judge: Witness, please pay careful attention to the question and answer that question. LORANDOS: My question is this, thank you your honor, you cannot cite any data published in a peer review journal necessitating that we reconsider the findings of Garner and Smith in 1976, correct? Witness: Correct. LORANDOS: Without the availability of other data necessitating reconsideration of Garner and Smiths 1976 findings, their results, published in a generally recognized peer review journal, are regarded by your profession as generally accepted, correct? Witness: Yes. LORANDOS: In other words, your profession generally recognizes and accepts that mental health professionals underestimate the strengths of normal populations, correct? Witness: That seems to be what that study demonstrated, yes. LORANDOS: Now, you came to the conclusion that Mr. Smith exhibits anxiety, depression, and anger, correct? Witness: Correct. LORANDOS: In arriving at your conclusions, you asked yourself, as any responsible health professional would, why Mr. Smith is anxious, depressed, and angry, correct? Witness: Correct. LORANDOS: And you probably entertained various possibilities as to why Mr. Smith was anxious, depressed, and angry, correct? Witness: Yes. LORANDOS: Are you aware that asking yourself why some condition exists can mistakenly lead you to assuming that the condition does exist when in fact it does not? Witness: No, not really. LORANDOS: Well, the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology is a generally recognized peer review journal in your field, correct? Witness: Yes.
Views: 628 AccusedFalsely
Wearing the Right Colors to Court - Do attorneys do this?
 
07:57
A basic overview and personal opinion on what is best to wear when going to court as a witness, a defendant, a juror or a bystander. Remember every color represents a psychological effect that is viewed by different people to mean different things. Mostly opinion and not scientific in nature it is meant to help choose the right color for the courtroom.
Views: 69310 Carl ToersBijns
USA:  OJ SIMPSON TRIAL: DENNIS FUNG
 
01:30
English/Nat The O-J Simpson prosecution scrambled Thursday to restore criminalist Dennis Fung's credibility after defence attorney Barry Scheck accused him of lying and destroying documents. In a cross-examination that lasted nearly five days Fung changed his story about receiving a vial of Simpson's blood from a police detective. Scheck also charged him with destroying a page from a crime report to protect police in the case. Tension rose in the courtroom Thursday during the fifth-day of cross examination of criminalist Dennis Fung by defence attorney Barry Scheck. Scheck accused Fung of lying in earlier testimony about his actions at the Simpson estate. The defence attorney charged that Fung was trying to protect police involved in the case. After Scheck showed him a defence videotape, Fung changed his testimony and claimed for the first time that it was his assistant who carried an envelope containing the blood vial out of Simpson's home, inside a black trash bag. He had earlier testified he carried the blood out to his truck after receiving it from a police detective. SOUNDBITE: DEFENCE ATTORNEY BARRY SCHECK: And when you saw these series of tapes, Mr. Fung, you realised that you had been caught in a lie, didn't you? CRIMINALIST DENNIS FUNG: No. Scheck's suggestion that the prosecution witness lied about the vial of Simpson's blood to cover up a police conspiracy was met with denials. SOUNDBITE: SCHECK: Mr. Fung, none of this ever happened in terms of putting that gray manila envelope in that plastic bag, isn't that right? FUNG: That's incorrect. Fung then faced further tough questioning from the defence attorney about missing or doctored pages in his crime report about the vial of blood, but the session ended with a prosecutor handing over the original document. You can license this story through AP Archive: http://www.aparchive.com/metadata/youtube/c88554bba3e8cbae96596720f1d3deba Find out more about AP Archive: http://www.aparchive.com/HowWeWork
Views: 60177 AP Archive
Cross-Examination Secret: How Does a NY Attorney Become Good at Questioning Witnesses?
 
04:13
How Does a NY Attorney Become So Good at Questioning Witnesses? http://www.oginski-law.com/blog/why-a-defendant-doctor-can-be-treated-as-a-hostile-witness-at-trial.cfm NY Medical Malpractice & Personal Injury Trial Lawyer 516-487-8207 Email: [email protected] There is only one true answer to the question. The only way that an attorney becomes an expert at questioning witnesses during pretrial testimony and at trial is by conducting hundreds and thousands of depositions. A deposition is a question and answer session of a witness, given under oath, in an attorney's office. This is commonly referred to as a 'deposition' or an 'examination before trial'. There is no substitute for experience. Well we all know that there some attorneys who are excellent at what they do. There are also attorneys who are merely good at what they do. Then, there some attorneys who are clearly not so good. Just like with anything else in life, the more you do it and the more supervision and mentors you have to guide you and teach you what to do right and what not to do, you will become an expert at learning how to question witnesses. When I started my legal career representing doctors and hospitals in medical malpractice lawsuits and also representing drivers who were sued in car accidents, not only was I sent to court every single day but it was also assigned to do at least one pretrial deposition each day. In some cases, we would do two depositions in a day. Every single day. For years. Can a young attorney having handled only a few cases learn how to question witnesses? Of course he can. But who do you think is more likely to understand the different strategies and tactics to use properly... Someone who has only a handful of cases under their belt or someone who has had the opportunity to question many hundreds if not thousands of witnesses during pretrial testimony in different types of lawsuits? When cross examining a witness at trial, it is critical to understand why you must lead the witness and put words into the witness's mouth. You also never want to ask the witness you are cross examining the dreaded "why?" question. The reason? You never know what he's going to say. Actually, you do. Whatever he says, you know it's going to hurt you and your client's case. When asking open-ended questions of your own witness, you have to understand the purpose and reason why you are doing that. Learning how to question witnesses is clearly an art and it is a learned art. The best trial attorneys in New York are constantly learning. They learn from other experienced attorneys and they learn what not to do from those who are still in the initial stages. Watch the video to learn more... Here's a cardiac malpractice case where I was able to achieve a $6 million dollar settlement for my client: http://www.oginski-law.com/video/cardiac-malpractice-in-ny.cfm Here's a foot surgery case where a Westchester, NY jury awarded my client $1.55 million dollars for her pain and suffering: http://ow.ly/azKg6 To learn more about how medical malpractice cases work in the state of New York, I encourage you to explore my educational website, ‪http://www.oginski-law.com/blog/why-a-defendant-doctor-can-be-treated-as-a-hostile-witness-at-trial.cfm‬. If you have legal questions, I invite you to pick up the phone and call me at 516-487-8207 or by email at [email protected] This is what I do every day and I'd be happy to chat with you. Law Office of Gerald Oginski 25 Great Neck Road, Ste. 4 Great Neck, NY 11021 516-487-8207 Email: [email protected]
Views: 1338 Gerry Oginski
DA Spares Andrea Constand of Pre Trial Cross Examination in Cosby Case
 
00:45
Prosecutors in Pennsylvania stated Bill Cosby's rights as a defendant do not guarantee he may face his accuser in a criminal sexual assault case. However, the prosecution added this specific right of a defendant is not applicable at state preliminary hearings. Montgomery County District Attorney Kevin Steele added he is using a recent rule change to spare his accuser, Andrea Constand, of cross-examination. Cosby's lawyers argued that the 2013 rule change deprives him of the constitutional right to due process; they have asked the judge to dismiss the case or schedule another preliminary hearing. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/prosecutor-says-he-will-not-make-cosbys-accuser-testify/ http://www.wochit.com This video was produced by YT Wochit News using http://wochit.com
Views: 355 Wochit News
Nuremberg Day 84 Goering (Jackson Cross)
 
06:47
On March 18, 1946, the long awaited cross examination of Hermann Goering by chief American Prosecutor Robert H. Jackson commenced. These are highlights of the first of three days of examinations. For further information, see www.roberthjackson.org
Views: 142933 RobertHJacksonCenter
Do Trial Lawyers CROSS EXAMINE EVERY Witness? NY Medical Malpractice Attorney Gerry Oginski Explains
 
05:17
Do Trial Lawyers CROSS EXAMINE EVERY Witness? https://www.oginski-law.com/library/he-screwed-up-cross-examination-big-time.cfm NY Medical Malpractice & Personal Injury Lawyer Gerry Oginski Explains 516-487-8207 Email: [email protected] #medicalmalpractice #medicalmalpracticelawyer Most people believe that trials are conducted the way they see them on TV. Courtroom dramas are filled will drama and excitement as the bad guy is about to be cross examined and the truth revealed. The reality is that not all trials happen the way you see them on TV or in the movies. On TV and in the movies, we expect that every witness who testifies against you will be cross examined. We expect that the attorney who is doing the cross examination will be vicious and unrelenting. We anticipate that the attorney who is cross examining a witness will be angry and expresses righteous indignation. We can also expect sarcasm and hard-hitting questions that demand to be answered. That's the expectation that most viewers have about cross-examination at trial. However, you should know that in real life, there are instances where an attorney, for strategic reasons, chooses not to cross-examine a witness. There are instances where an attorney chooses, again, for strategic reasons, not to be angry and not to yell and scream during his questioning. Instead, an attorney may actually be polite and kind. This flies in the face of what we expect during a trial here in New York. Watch the video to learn more... Here's a cardiac malpractice case where I was able to achieve a $6 million dollar settlement for my client: http://www.oginski-law.com/video/cardiac-malpractice-in-ny.cfm To learn more about how accident & medical malpractice cases work in the state of New York, I encourage you to explore my educational website, ‪https://www.oginski-law.com/library/he-screwed-up-cross-examination-big-time.cfm‬ If you have legal questions and your matter happened here in New York and you're thinking about bringing a lawsuit, I invite you to pick up the phone and call me at 516-487-8207 or by email at [email protected] This is what I do every day and I'd be happy to chat with you. Law Office of Gerald Oginski 35 South Drive Great Neck, NY 11021 516-487-8207 Email: [email protected]
Views: 71 Gerry Oginski
What is a Federal Grand Jury?
 
05:09
Federal criminal defense attorney Ryan Pacyga explains what a Federal Grand Jury is, how it works, and what the purpose is. A federal grand jury is a group of 16-23 people that are required to come meet secretly with a federal prosecutor and decide if the prosecutor has presented enough evidence to issue an Indictment (a criminal charge). Grand jury proceedings work differently than court. There is no judge. There is no defense lawyer in the room. Nobody gets to cross examine the witnesses, and the defendant does not get to hear about the hearings or present any evidence in their defense. Basically, the federal prosecutor is in control and his or her job is to get an indictment from the Grand Jury. If you receive a subpoena to come testify at a grand jury hearing or to produce documents or evidence to a grand jury, you should immediately call a federal criminal defense lawyer to discuss your rights as well as the risks. Ryan Pacyga defends federal criminal cases throughout the nation. I can be reached at www.ArrestedMN.com
Views: 1760 Ryan Pacyga
Cross Examination of Vocational and Medical Experts
 
01:39:43
10/5/09 Prairie State Legal Services
Pre-Trial Strategy: Can I Cross-Examine Doctor During His Deposition? NY Attorney Oginski Explains
 
04:07
Pre-Trial Strategy: Can I Cross-Examine Doctor During His Deposition? http://www.oginski-law.com/library/pretrial-testimony-can-make-or-break-your-malpractice-case.cfm NY Medical Malpractice & Personal Injury Lawyer Gerry Oginski Explains 516-487-8207 Email: [email protected] It's a medical Malpractice case. During the course of your lawsuit, I will have an opportunity to question the doctor whom you believe was careless. This pretrial testimony carries the same exact weight as if the doctor is testifying at trial. The only difference is that this question and answer session is being done in the defense lawyer's office. There is a court reporter present to record all of the questions and all the answers that are given. Some people believe that a deposition is simply an opportunity for me to ask open-ended questions to allow the doctor to explain everything. Actually, that's not true. I find that the best trial attorneys in New York are ones who use the deposition as preparation for trial. Personally, I like to conduct a very detailed cross examination of the doctor. You should know,that at trial, when I call the doctor to the witness stand, I am permitted by law to treat him as a hostile witness even though I am calling him to the witness stand. Since he is also a licensed and board certified physician, the law allows me to treat him as a medical expert. That means that I can use leading questions to ask the doctor what I need to. You should also know that there will be certain times during the doctor's question and answer session where I will ask open-ended questions and allow the doctor to explain what he did and why. This is very important for me to understand his rationale behind his thinking and his actions. Some defense lawyers do not prepare their doctors for this type of cross examination and get very upset with me when I begin to do this. The defense lawyers will typically start objecting to most of my questions for the sole reason I'm asking leading questions. That leads me to respond, usually in a very pleasant manner but asking a simple question... “Can you show me where in the CPL are it says that I have to ask open-ended questions during your clients deposition? Can you show me any case law that says I cannot conduct a cross examination during this deposition?” That usually causes a defense attorney to stumble at which point I usually continue asking leading questions. Watch the video to learn more... Here's a cardiac malpractice case where I was able to achieve a $6 million dollar settlement for my client: http://www.oginski-law.com/video/cardiac-malpractice-in-ny.cfm To learn more about how accident & medical malpractice cases work in the state of New York, I encourage you to explore my educational website, http://www.oginski-law.com/library/pretrial-testimony-can-make-or-break-your-malpractice-case.cfm. If you have legal questions and your matter happened here in New York and you're thinking about bringing a lawsuit, I invite you to pick up the phone and call me at 516-487-8207 or by email at [email protected] This is what I do every day and I'd be happy to chat with you. Law Office of Gerald Oginski 35 South Drive Great Neck, NY 11021 516-487-8207 Email: [email protected]
Views: 116 Gerry Oginski
PLvsAA OST - 2-07 - Cross-Examination ~ Allegro (English Court Suite)
 
01:01
Music from the official soundtrack to Professor Layton vs. Ace Attorney. Tracks 1-10 of Phoenix's disc are designed to be listened to as a suite, and so do not fade out as normal.
Views: 71251 Bolt2nd
Evidence Matters: cross examination film clip 5
 
01:31
Do ensure you outline your expertise at the beginning of your report
Views: 526 researchinpractice
Cross-Examination Goal: Get Medical Expert to Agree-NY Medical Malpractice Lawyer Explains
 
03:54
Cross-Examination Goal...Get Defense Medical Expert to Agree NY Medical Malpractice Lawyer Gerry Oginski Explains http://www.oginski-law.com/library/cross-examination-strategies-in-ny-civil-lawsuits.cfm 516-487-8207 Email: [email protected] Some people think that my job as an attorney who represents an injured victim is simply to cross-examine the defense's medical expert on the substance of what he has testified about. That is one of the goals of cross examination. However, it is not the only goal. Before ever getting up to cross examine the defense's medical expert, I will prepare extensively. I will have formulated a specific agenda that I need to achieve during my cross examination. There is also something known as a collateral attack. That could be an attack on other issues unrelated to this particular trial. I am permitted to attack the doctor's credibility. I'm permitted to question the doctor about his prior testimony in other cases. I can ask the doctor about how much he is being compensated and what percentage of his time is spent being in court compared to actually practicing medicine. Another fertile area of cross examination has nothing to do with being hostile or entirely adversarial. Ironically, most people believe that cross examination is equivalent to hostile examination. That is simply untrue. There are many instances where we conduct cross examination in a very pleasant manner. Cross-examination is really designed to search for the kernel of truth and focus on the disputed issues. One of the key goals when I get up to cross-examine the defense's medical expert is to get him to agree with as many things as our expert has testified to as possible. Why would I do that? In order to bolster our case. Then, at the end of the trial I can argue to the jury that not only did our experts indicate the following things were done incorrectly but that the defense experts also agreed with us that X,Y and Z was not done. If we can get the defense expert to acknowledge and agree to certain key issues, now we can use that to show to the jury that we are more likely right and wrong. Watch the video to learn more... Here's a cardiac malpractice case where I was able to achieve a $6 million dollar settlement for my client: http://www.oginski-law.com/video/cardiac-malpractice-in-ny.cfm Here's a foot surgery case where a Westchester, NY jury awarded my client $1.55 million dollars for her pain and suffering: http://ow.ly/azKg6 To learn more about how medical malpractice cases work in the state of New York, I encourage you to explore my educational website, ‪http://www.oginski-law.com/library/cross-examination-strategies-in-ny-civil-lawsuits.cfm. If you have legal questions, I invite you to pick up the phone and call me at 516-487-8207 or by email at [email protected] This is what I do every day and I'd be happy to chat with you. Law Office of Gerald Oginski 25 Great Neck Road, Ste. 4 Great Neck, NY 11021 516-487-8207 Email: [email protected]
Views: 219 Gerry Oginski
East Palo Alto Youth Court -- Direct and Cross Examination
 
01:50
Watch the East Palo Alto Youth Court in action! The East Palo Alto Youth Court is a community-based diversion program through which young people who have committed minor offenses make amends for the harm done and constructively contribute to the East Palo Alto community through positive peer influence and adult assistance. For more information, visit www.epayouthcourt.org. This video was recorded on Thursday, March 26 at the City Hall for East Palo Alto. Recorded by Patricia C. Neme, Video Operator, Cablecast by Media Center, channel 29.
Views: 1534 EPAYOUTHCOURT
Cross Examination ~ Moderato 2016 - Ace Attorney 6: Spirit Of Justice OST
 
02:14
Ripped by me. Image by me. This is the highest quality possible. Taken straight from the game's files.
Views: 44399 pumpkin pips
Jeffrey Dahmer - Full Trial - Serial Killer
 
01:33:43
Complete trial of Jeffrey Dahmer.
Views: 1256204 Jesusmalaark11
Carlos Miller's trial: Miami-Dade Police Major Nancy Perez caught in lie on witness stand
 
04:26
http://www.photographyisnotacrime.com/2012/11/08/not-guilty/
Views: 178165 PINAC News
You Want to Cross Examine Your Doctor During Your Trial-Can You Do That?
 
03:26
You Want to Cross Examine Your Doctor During Your Trial-Can You Do That? http://www.oginski-law.com/library/trial-strategy--cross-examination-of-a-medical-expert-using-hypothetical-questions-at-trial.cfm NY Medical Malpractice & Personal Injury Lawyer Gerry Oginski Explains 516-487-8207 Email: [email protected] You love to ask questions. You think you'd make a great lawyer. Everyone tells you that you interrogate people better than any lawyer. You can question someone left and right. You are persistent. You just don't stop till you get the answer you're looking for. Your doctor was careless. His carelessness cause you injury. Now your injury is permanent. You've sued your doctor. Here in New York. For medical malpractice. Your physician says he did nothing wrong. He says you must have caused your own injury. And, he says your injuries aren't really that bad. So, your case goes to trial. It's been a few years since this incident happened. You've been replaying it every day. You'd love the opportunity to question your doctor at trial. But hey, you're not an attorney. You do some research and wonder why you can't cross examine him. You bring this idea up to your lawyer. You tell him you'd love to cross-examine your doctor at trial. You want to do it. You want to pin him down and make him answer your questions. "WHY DID YOU DO THIS TO ME?" you want to shout at him. Can you do this? Should you do this? Is this wise? Watch the video to learn more... Here's a cardiac malpractice case where I was able to achieve a $6 million dollar settlement for my client: http://www.oginski-law.com/video/cardiac-malpractice-in-ny.cfm To learn more about how accident & medical malpractice cases work in the state of New York, I encourage you to explore my educational website, ‪http://www.oginski-law.com/library/trial-strategy--cross-examination-of-a-medical-expert-using-hypothetical-questions-at-trial.cfm If you have legal questions and your matter happened here in New York and you're thinking about bringing a lawsuit, I invite you to pick up the phone and call me at 516-487-8207 or by email at [email protected] This is what I do every day and I'd be happy to chat with you. Law Office of Gerald Oginski 35 South Drive Great Neck, NY 11021 516-487-8207 Email: [email protected]
Views: 46 Gerry Oginski
Mark Fuhrman pleads the 5th during OJ Simpson trial.
 
01:05
Mark Fuhrman pleads the 5th during OJ Simpson trial.
Views: 343059 Abd Azrad
Why jury trials are becoming less common
 
04:23
A new analysis of federal court cases published last week by The New York Times shows that jury trials are becoming increasingly less common. In 1997, 3,200 out of 63,000 federal defendants were convicted in jury trials. But by 2015, even as the number of defendants grew to 81,000, jury convictions dropped to 1,650. Benjamin Weiser of The New York Times joins William Brangham from Maine.
Views: 8471 PBS NewsHour
Saddam trial resumes, appears in court
 
01:40
1. Court sign 2. Judge Abdel-Raouf starting court hearing 3. Saddam Hussein standing up 4. Back shot saddam standing 5. SOUNDBITE (Arabic): Saddam Hussein: "You should resort to an impartial, international body and not a body that kills thousands of people on the streets and tortures them, the so called Interior Ministry" 5. SOUNDBITE (Arabic): Judge Abdel-Raouf: "Don''t venture into political matters, we gave you the chance, talk about the legal issue.'''' 6. Wide shot of Saddam talking 7. SOUNDBITE (Arabic): Saddam Hussein: "If you are scared of the Interior Minister, he doesn''t scare my dog,'''' 8. Wide shot defence team 9. Close-up Judge Abdel-Raouf 10. Saddam Hussein sitting down 11. Wide shot Saddam Hussein sitting down with prosecution in background (red robes) STORYLINE: Deposed Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein Wednesday accused the country''s Shiite-led Interior Ministry of killing and torturing "thousands'''' of people. Saddam appeared in court Wednesday for questioning by judges and prosecutors on charges of killings of Shiites in the 1980s. He is being cross-examined for the first time in his six-month-old trial and was the sole defendant in the courtroom as Wednesday''s session opened. His seven co-defendants testified one-by-one in earlier sessions over their alleged role in a crackdown against Shiites in the town of Dujail, launched in 1982. The session came a day after prosecutors indicted Saddam on separate charges of genocide, accusing him of trying to exterminate Kurds in a 1980s campaign in northern Iraq that killed an estimated 100-thousand people. The charges will be dealt with in a separate trial. Wednesday''s cross-examination was the judge''s and prosecutors'' first opportunity in the six-month-old trial to directly question Saddam over allegations he directed a crackdown against Dujail residents in which 140 Shiites were killed and hundreds were imprisoned, some of them undergoing torture. Saddam has acknowledged ordering the trial after which the 140 Shiites were sentenced to death. But he has maintained that his actions were legal because they were in response to a 1982 assassination attempt against him in Dujail. In court Wednesday, Saddam demanded an international body examine signatures alleged to be his on documents the prosecution has presented concerning the crackdown, including an order approving the death sentences. "You should resort to an impartial, international body and not a body that kills thousands of people on the streets and tortures them, the so called Interior Ministry" Saddam told judge Abdel-Raouf. Saddam was referring to the now Shiite-controlled ministry, which some Iraqis accuse of backing Shiite militias that have killed Sunni Arabs. "Don''t venture into political matters,'''' Abdel-Raouf replied" "If you are scared of the Interior Minister, he doesn''t scare my dog,'''' Saddam retorted. Iraq has seen a wave of killings and attacks between Shiites and Sunnis since the February 22 bombing of a Shiite shrine in the city of Samarra. You can license this story through AP Archive: http://www.aparchive.com/metadata/youtube/56f03e68343938115a9a7b55121ad28f Find out more about AP Archive: http://www.aparchive.com/HowWeWork
Views: 1414 AP Archive
Do I have to testify at a Trial for DUI?
 
01:53
MICHAEL DELSIGNORE [email protected] 781 686 5924 http://www.delsignoredefense.com http://www.delsignoredefense.com/dui-case-results.html Many people facing a DUI/OUI charge want to know whether they will have to testify in court for their DUI charge. In this video, Massachusetts Attorney Michael Delsignore describes why you will not have to testify during your trial and why the government cannot force you to testify against yourself. This law works in favor of the defendant as you will not have to face cross-examination and the focus will remain on the government's burden of proof to convict you. 530 Washington Street Stoughton, MA 02072 781-686-5924 7 North Main Street, Suite 219A Attleboro, MA 02703 508-455-4755 Transcript: I’m Michael DelSignore, a Massachusetts OUI Lawyer. In today's video, I’m going to answer the question, Will you have to testify if you're OUI case in Massachusetts goes to trial? The answer is “no”. The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution says that no person has to testify against himself. So what does this mean? It means that the government can't force you testify, can't force you to get up on the stand tell your story. It also means that a jury or judge is not permitted to defer anything from your refusal to testify. In many cases there’s a good reason why you wouldn’t testify, when you testify it's going to bring up facts about your night, how much you had to drink? when you drink? what type of alcohol? When you don't testify keeps the focus on the government's case in other words you’re arrested based on field sobriety test, a one-leg stand, the nine step walk and turn. The tests are inaccurate, unreliable, many can even fail even if you consume no alcohol at all. You’re arrested based on an opinion of an Officer and the Officer’s opinion is very subjective, the Officer is free to dispose to arrest you. So one person doesn't testify keeps the focus on, there’s always seven enough to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt. Many of the best decision is not to testify to the surface of the amendment privilege against self-incrimination put the government to the burden of proof and in most cases that's the strongest defense. While you can testify in the trial, most cases I would advise the client that they don't have to testify is not much to gain from it. Most people would be nervous on a stand and wouldn’t be able to articulate these circumstances as well as they should be able to. So you don't have to testify shouldn’t be nervous about that. If you have any questions about know an OUI trial, why you gonna have to testify feel free to call me my name is Michael DelSignore, I answer these questions every day.
Views: 377 Michael Delsignore
What is a Defendant's Medical Examination?
 
00:48
http://www.MrCarAccident.com is a Connecticut car accident and personal injury legal group with lawyers throughout Connecticut representing victims. This video answers the all important question: What is a Defendant's Medical Examination? Connecticut Personal Injury and Car Accident Lawyers at MrCarAccident.com with offices throughout Connecticut helping injured people recover money damages for their injuries. If you have been injured in a car accident, either as a passenger or a driver, or have other injuries from either a slip and daly accident, a workplace accident or medical malpractice, contact us today to see how a lawyer from Mr. Car Accident.com can help you with your case. Our lawyers have years of training and experience handling automobile accident cases and have recovered millions of dollars in accident cases in Connecticut. Find out more about our lawyers on our website and speak with a lawyer today about your case. Call: 888-203-8282 http://MrCarAccident.com with locations at: 21 Holmes Avenue Waterbury, CT 06710 1 Enterprise Drive Suite 305 Shelton, CT 06484 1290 Silas Deane Highway Wethersfield, CT 06109 We welcome you to visit our youtube channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0GIj4YliR-N_XmnS71PO5g with dozens of informative videos about the personal injury system in Connecticut.
Views: 58 Mr. Car Accident
Stopping Defendant from Presenting Cumulative Expert Testimony at Trial
 
02:52
Defense experts often seek to admit cumulative expert testimony in an effort to sell the jury on the notion that "everyone" in the medical community agrees with them. Plaintiffs' counsel has to fight hard to thwart these efforts. If you think the defendant is going to try to do this - and they always try to keep open the option of it - you have to go to the court to question why multiple experts are warranted if there testimony largely overlaps. Most judges don't want an unnecessarily long trial and will discourage efforts by defense lawyers to try to bolster their case by presenting cumulative expert testimony. You can fight for this relief even when there are multiple defendants. So co-defendants are often going to be required by the court to jointly pick their best expert. That said. all of these issue are within the trial court's discretion. You make your best arguments you can based on the facts.
Views: 335 Miller & Zois, LLC
CPD Course: Cross-Examination - Clip 2
 
05:46
CPD Course: Cross-Examination http://www.profectional.com/cpd/evt000000024/ Presented by Mr. Clive Grossman, Q.C., S.C., Barrister-at-Law, Parkside Chambers 6 June 2014 (Friday) Ever wanted to dominate the courtroom with extensive cross-examination techniques? This dynamic course is designed to equip the participants with practical tips and effective methods on cross-examination, do not miss this rare opportunity to benefit from the experience and knowledge of Mr. Clive Grossman, Q.C., S.C. and his team of trial advocacy experts from Parkside Chambers. At the end of the course, participants should be able to understand cross-examination in greater details and to grasp and improve his/her cross-examinational skills. Lecture on Cross-Examination First half of the course features a lecture by renowned litigator and experienced presenter Mr. Clive Grossman, Q.C., S.C., who will guide the audience through the cross-examination process by providing instructive examples and tactical insights of the subject. The lecture will cover the followings: - Objectives and Purposes of Cross-Examination - Basic Methods of Cross-Examination - Cautionary Rules - Practical Aspects - The Cross-Examiner at Work - Expert Witnesses - Errors in Cross-Examination Workshop on Cross-Examination The course is then followed by an interactive workshop, inviting the audience to participate in an cross-examination role-play exercise. Trial advocacy professionals from Parkside Chambers will act as witnesses and the participants will be able to apply the learnt techniques from the first session straight away, to cross-examine them based on a criminal case scenario. Throughout the workshop, Mr. Grossman will comment and share his experience and expertise in cross-examination with practical tips and suggestions which aims to improve the participants' skills. The workshop will be based on an Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm (Cap.212 s.39) case scenario, those who successfully registered the course will receive a set of preparation materials, which include the followings: - Indictment - Witness Statements - Exhibit List - Record of Interview with the Defendant at the Police Station - List of Previous Convictions - Defence Statement We encourage all participants to read and study the materials thoroughly and prepare for the workshop, as he/she may be required to undertake the cross-examination role-play exercise. The Profectional Company Limited - http://www.profectional.com/

Us department of state authentication cover letter
How to start a cover letter engineering intern
Vet cover letters examples
Sample cover letter for any vacant position application
Annotated bibliography thesis example sentence