Mock Trial Objections

Improper Opinion

not an expert or not the experts area

asked and answer

witness has already testified about this

speculation

guessing about something

lack of foundation

didn’t take information in small steps that make sense or build on the ideas correctly

non-responsive

witness seems to be evading the answer

narration

witness is going beyond the question asked

improper religious testimony

using religion to build up or destroy the character of a witness

scope of trial

objection only for redirect or recross-going over information not brought up

arguing fact not in evidence

the counsel on closing brings up information that didn’t get in during the trial

creating a material fact not found in the record

something being said is materially affecting the outcome of the case

relevance

not important to the case

leading question

getting the witness to say what you want instead of telling their story (not allowed in direct examination, you can lead on cross examination)

improper character testimony

going after the witness’ action or abilities, only the witness’ reputation/character for truthfulness is at issue here

hearsay

out of court statement to prove the truth of the matter-ask to strike

lack of personal knowledge

doesn’t have information about the particular issue

argumentative/badgering

attorney argues or seems to be presenting an argument in the guise of a question

compound question

the attorney combines two or more distinct questions into a single question, making it confusing for the witness to answer

asked and answered

the attorney repeats a question that has already been asked of and answered by the same witness

narrative

the question is too broad and invites the witness to tell a long, open-ended story instead of answering specific questions

unfair prejudice

the probative (proof) value of the evidence is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, or wasting time

beyond the scope

on cross-examination or redirect, the question asks about matters not brought up during the previous line of questioning

improper impeachment

attorney attacks a witness’s credibility or uses a prior statement/evidence in a way that violates rules of evidence or constitutional protections