Thus, an argumentative objection may be raised only when the lawyer himself is making a legal argument under the guise of asking a question. "Badgering the witness" is the proper objection for a lawyer who is antagonizing or mocking a witness by asking insulting or derisive questions, perhaps in an attempt to provoke an emotional response.
One of the objections which an attorney might make to a question raised by his or her opposing attorney within a trial is the objection of “asked and answered.” This objection would normally be raised after the opposing attorney asks a question which has already been answered in some capacity.
So, simply put, the hearsay rule says that secondhand testimony is not admissible in court. Unless... As with any rule, there are exceptions, and the hearsay rule has plenty of them. If you are a pro se litigant, it is important to understand which kinds of hearsay evidence are admissible and which ones aren't. Remember: don't believe everything you see on TV. Below you can find legal yet easy to understand explanations of some commonly-known (and misunderstood) exceptions to the hearsay rule.
If the character trait evidence is first raised by the prosecution, it is improper and objectionable. The third exception to the rule is evidence of the character of any witness. This exception only permits evidence on the witness' character for truthfulness or untruthfulness. Any other character trait of a witness is inadmissible.
An objection of incompetence might be raised by either the prosecution or the defense in a trial, in order to have the evidence granted by a given witness disallowed on the grounds that the witness in question is incompetent to provide such evidence, or to testify in some capacity.
An objection regarding an inflammatory statement or question would likely require significant judgment on the part of the judge as to whether or not it was inflammatory and appropriate for being disallowed, unless the statement was clearly and unquestionably inflammatory.
16 Objections - Opinions differ, but this objection is primarily thought to be used only by the person asking the question. Relevance (401) - The evidence being solicited does not relate to merits of the case or another admissible purpose such as foundation or permissible character evidence.
One of the objections which either the defense attorney or the prosecution attorney in a trial might be able to rise is that of a misleading, confusing, vague, unintelligible, or ambiguous question. These objections should be raised immediately after the provoking question.
Often the key is understanding what is stopping a potential client from making a decision in your favor. Once you know why he is hesitating, you can reply directly to that specific objection. You may hear these sales objections during the selling process; learn how you can overcome each one.
While the generic objection "as to form" allows you to get out your objection quickly, you risk not fully preserving the objection and not properly giving your adversary notice allowing him to reword his question, and you are acting contrary to the rules of practice in some jurisdictions.
Many of the objections that apply in court do not apply in a deposition; however, some objections are acceptable in a deposition. Asked & Answered Objections – If the attorney for the opposing party continues to ask questions that are simply reworded, the attorney may be attempting to get the witness to contradict a previous statement.
Speculation as an objection might arise in one of two forms. The first form of the speculation objection would be an objection against a question which calls for the witness to speculate, or to provide an answer to a question which he or she would obviously not know the answer to.