How to Cross-Examine at Trial with Inconsistent Statements

Ervin A. Gonzalez begins an article about cross-examination by explaining how to impeach with inconsistent deposition testimony:

When a witness makes a statement in trial that is inconsistent with his or her deposition testimony, you should first highlight the question that was answered differently at trial. Make sure that the trial testimony being impeached is a direct inconsistent statement with the deposition given before trial. You should then ask the following questions:

--Do you remember having had your deposition taken on (state the date)?
--Do you remember that a court reporter was present at your deposition?
--Do you remember having been sworn in to tell the truth?
--Did you tell the truth on that date?
(If applicable) --Do you remember having your attorney present at your deposition?

After you have set the foundation for the impeachment, then you should ask the witness the following question: "Do you remember having been asked the following question and your giving the following answer." At this point, you should read the question previously asked and the answer given by the witness in the deposition.

The article also discusses how to impeach with inconsistent statements in documents. A final section deals with the cross-examination of experts, and concludes with this reminder: "Although there are many ways to effectively cross-examine an opposing expert, you should only choose two or three areas of attack at trial . . . When cross-examining the opposing expert, be prepared, be thorough, hit your two or three areas of attack, expose the expert's weak points, then politely thank the expert and sit down."