Cross-Examination: Comparison of Different Approaches

, New York Law Journal


In their Trial Advocacy column, Ben Rubinowitz, a partner at Gair, Gair, Conason, Steigman, Mackauf, Bloom & Rubinowitz, and Evan Torgan, a member of Torgan & Cooper, write that where a witness is lying, the questions and the manner in which they are presented should be crafted to slowly demonstrate the improbability of the witness' story, leaving the jury little doubt that it should reject the witness as untrustworthy.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at

What's being said


    Sounds great if your adversary is sleeping on his desk. If he knows the misidentification is coming out anyway, he's not going to get up and stipulate to it so as to cut off all the extra B.S. you could have otherwise used on cross regarding deception?

  • not available

    Excellent suggestions on effective cross-examination Ben!
    Regarding the witness who provided two false names to two police officers, I might add: "And since you now have admitted lying two times, and caught right not before this jury, lying two times , would you agree with the statement, that each time one is caught in an untruth, one has engaged in untruths on many many times for which one was not caught"? Then if the judge would let me get away with it, I would end the cross with this question: "And now do you really expect these good people of the jury to believe ANYTHING you say?"

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202575819706

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.