Mock Trial Objections - Mr. Tyler's Lessons · PDF fileMock Trial Objections The basics of every objection allowed in the Mock Trial universe

Mock Trial Objections The basics of every objection allowed in the Mock

Trial universe.

Questions calling for a Narrative

answer/Narrating ● Questions that are vague and allow for a long, drawn

out answer are inappropriate

● Ex.) Attorney: “Tell us what you know about the case.”

● When objecting, the attorney should stand and say

“Objection. This question calls for a narrative

answer.” or “Objection. The witness is

narrating.”

Relevance ● Relevant evidence is evidence presented that tends

to prove or disprove any material fact related to the

case. Material facts are in the jury instructions.

● Ex.) Attorney: “What did you have for breakfast?”


“Objection. This question is irrelevant.”

Materials: premeditation, intent, malice

aforethought, kill a person.

Character of the Witness ● Character evidence is evidence that concerns some

trait about the witness other than honesty or

truthfulness.

● Ex.) Attorney (crossing a lay witness): Miss, can you

please explain to the court why you received a

speeding ticket 5 months ago?


“Objection. This question calls for improper

character evidence.”

Lack of Personal/Professional

Knowledge ● Questions that call for hearsay testimony or a lay

witness’s opinion are inappropriate as they call for

something that the witness has no knowledge of.

● Ex.) Attorney: Do you think that the driver was drunk at

the time of the hit and run?


“Objection. The witness does not have the

personal knowledge to answer this question.”

Leading Questions ● Only allowed during cross-examination and when

laying foundation, leading questions are questions

that suggest the answer.

● Attorney: The money was under the hay bale, correct?


“Objection. Counsel is leading the witness.”

Beyond the Scope ● Questions that cover information outside of what the

crossing attorney/re-directing attorney brought up in

questioning are considered beyond the scope.


“Objection. Counsel is asking a question which is

beyond the scope of my cross/re-direct

examination.”

Hearsay ● Perhaps the most common objection, Hearsay is “an out

of court statement being offered in court to prove the

truth of the matter asserted.”

● Ex.) Attorney: Now Ms. Smith, you say that you heard your

neighbor say that he was going to kill his wife?


“Objection. This question calls for hearsay.” or

“Objection. The witness’s answer is based on

hearsay.”

● When objecting to hearsay, be ready for a fight as there

are a plethora of ways to get around a hearsay objection.

Argumentative ● Argumentative questioning is when the opposing

attorney questions the witness roughly or in a harsh

tone.

● Ex.) Attorney: You killed your wife!!


“Objection. Counsel is being argumentative.”

Badgering ● Similar to argumentative questioning, badgering the

witness is when the opposing attorney asks the

same question several times in order to harass the

witness, usually done in a harsh manner.


“Objection. Counsel is badgering the witness.”

Asked and Answered ● Asked and answered is when a question that has

already been asked and answered is being asked

again. Most often, attorneys do this when they don’t

get the answer they wanted.


“Objection. This question has already been

asked and answered.”

Assumes Facts Not in

Evidence ● Questions that assume facts not in evidence jump

straight to the point without showing how they got

there. In other words, they ask about facts that have

not been shown to exist.

● Ex.) Attorney (without proving there was a pie in the

first place): You stole the pie, didn’t you?


“Objection. This question assumes facts not in

evidence.”

Lack of Foundation ● Lack of foundation is an objection that arises when

an attorney begins to question a witness about a

certain subject without first proving that (s)he is

qualified to answer questions about said subject.

● Ex.) Attorney: Can you tell the court a little about how

the bomb was built?


“Objection. Counsel has not laid the appropriate

foundation.”

● NOTE: The opposing party may ask for you to

explain how the appropriate foundation has not been

laid.

Speculation ● Closely tied to Lack of Personal Knowledge,

speculative questions ask a witness to testify to the

motives, intentions, or reasons behind the actions of

another without knowledge of said motives,

intentions, or reasons.

● Ex.) Attorney: Why do you think he did it?


“Objection. This question calls for speculation.”

Unresponsive ● The attorney directing or crossing a witness may

object if the witness does not directly respond to the

questions put to him/her. Witnesses may also be

unresponsive if their testimony goes beyond what is

asked.

● When objecting, the attorney (who should already be

standing) should say “Objection. The witness is

being/has become unresponsive.”

Unfair Extrapolation ● Unfair extrapolation is when a witness includes

testimony that was not originally included in the case

materials and this testimony can potentially affect the

trial’s outcome.


“Objection. The witness is unfairly

extrapolating.” or “Objection. The witness’s

testimony is going beyond the information

provided in the case materials.”

● NOTE: This objection should only be made if the

extra information has a profound impact on the trial.

Something to remember with

objections in Mock Trial ● Most of the time in Mock Trial, attorney will say

“Objection” followed by just the objection. They then

offer a brief explanation.

● Ex.) “Objection, assumes facts not in evidence. There

is no evidence that my client knew this Mrs. Smith that

opposing counsel is referring to.”

Read the following excerpt from the affidavit of

Rankin Bass carefully, then decide on the

appropriate objections for the upcoming scenarios.

“On one occasion, I overheard a man who was selling home-

made pastries at the market telling his wife that the reason no

one was purchasing their goods was because the Spree Party

made them outcasts. He said that he thought the Spree had

spies coming to the Knave Party organization meeting that

reported who was in attendance. He felt that it was not just a

coincidence that his business declined shortly after he started

going to the meetings. In my opinion, his pastries were not very

good. Maybe that had something to do with his lack of

customers.”

Directing Attorney: Rankin, how did you know this

pastry salesman’s political affiliation?

Rankin: Well apart from hearing him say he was a

Knave, he had a sign saying “I Hate Oprah Xram!”

(the ruler at the time), who was a Spree, and after

someone walked by and claimed they were a Spree,

he threw a pastry at them.

Crossing Attorney: Objection. Unfair extrapolation. ANSWER #1

Crossing Attorney: Now, Miss Bass, what color were

these pastries?

Directing Attorney: Objection. Relevance. ANSWER #2

Crossing Attorney: You said this man was selling home-

made pastries?

Rankin: Yes.

Crossing Attorney: He sold pastries?

Rankin: Yes, home-made.

Crossing Attorney: So, he was a pastry salesman?

Directing Attorney: Objection. Asked and answered. ANSWER #3

Crossing Attorney: Do you think this pastry salesman

was a Unabomber?

Directing Attorney: Objection. Speculation. ANSWER #4

Crossing Attorney: How can you say his pastries were

not good!? Are you familiar with the Freedonian

customs and food choices?

Directing Attorney: Objection. Argumentative. ANSWER #5

Crossing Attorney: Miss Bass, what was this pastry

salesman’s financial situation?

Directing Attorney: Objection. Lack of Personal Knowledge. ANSWER #6

Directing Attorney: Miss Bass, let’s go back a little to

something we forgot to talk about my first time around

questioning you…

Crossing Attorney: Objection. Beyond the scope. ANSWER #7

Rankin: Well, let me start from the beginning…(talks for

1 minute)

Crossing Attorney: Objection. Narrative. ANSWER #8

Crossing Attorney: Miss Bass, do you have a criminal

record?

Rankin: No.

Crossing Attorney: But I have here that you’ve been

busted for speeding, and it looks like you received a

ticket.

Directing Attorney: Objection.

This question calls for improper character evidence. ANSWER #9

Crossing Attorney: Miss Bass, this pastry salesman

allegedly attended Knave meetings?

Rankin: Of course he sold pastries.

Crossing Attorney: But he did attend Knave meetings?

Rankin: Well, yes and no. I heard him say something,

but I can’t really tell for sure.

Crossing Attorney: So is that a yes or a no?

Rankin: Well…

Crossing Attorney: Objection. Unresponsive.

(Usually the attorney does not say “objection” for this.)

ANSWER #10

Directing Attorney: And what, if anything, did this

salesman say?

Crossing Attorney: Objection. Hearsay. ANSWER #11

Crossing Attorney: Miss Bass, what hand did you hold the

gun in?

Directing Attorney:

Objection! Assumes facts not in evidence. ANSWER #12

Directing Attorney (1st Question): Miss Bass, will you

please tell the court about the incident concerning the

pastry salesman.

Crossing Attorney: Objection. Lack of foundation. ANSWER #13

Crossing Attorney: You heard this pastry salesman say

business had gone down?

Rankin: Yes.

Crossing Attorney: You’re telling me that you heard him

say his business had gone down?

Rankin: Yes.

Crossing Attorney: How can you be sure of this? Were

you part of his business?

Directing Attorney: Objection. Badgering. ANSWER #14

Directing Attorney: Rankin, you said the pastries tasted

bad, right?

Crossing Attorney: Objection. Leading. ANSWER #15

One final note… ● Keep in mind that the vast majority of objections in

the Mock Trial universe will not be even close to this

easy or clear cut. Most objections can be

overlapped. Other things may seem objectionable

when in actuality they are not.

● Keep practicing the objections and hopefully you will

have them mastered by the time the competition

comes around.

Mock Trial Objections - Mr. Tyler's Lessons · PDF fileMock Trial Objections The basics of every objection allowed in the Mock Trial universe

Documents