![Transcription Center logo](/themes/custom/tc_theme/assets/image/logo.png)
This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.
4 LOGGER'S SHEET LOGGER: Lita Aldridge REEL NUMBER: 2B STAGE: Trial Lawyers DATE: 7/6/86 PRESENTER G. Ingram GROUP NAME: Direct & Cross Exam [[strikethrough]] Nelson [[/strikethrough]] Freeman Case Nelson REGION/STYLE: Civil case [[2 Columned Table]] | PERFORMER(S) | INSTRUMENT/OCCUPATION | | --- | --- | | Germaine Ingram | Phila. | | Tom Alexander rep Defendant | Houston | | Arthur Raynes rep Plaintiff | Phila. | | Jim Carrigan-Judge | Denver | CONTENTS 1. Ingram: background info American Toy Co. Child has learning disabilities & behavior problems. Game unreasonably [[strikethrough]] 2.3.4.5.6.[[/strikethrough]] dangerous-inadequate warning. Defendant, Martin Nelson, game designer. 2. Alexander: purpose of direct exam of own witness. Must get a cross credibility of witness to Jury. sublimate self. Establish who-what-when-where-why, "visual journalist" Refer to easel: Must establish game unreasonably dang. 3. Carrigan: comment re music 4. Alexander: direct cross-exam of M Nelson Establish that Nelson is expert witness. [[strikethrough]] 7.8.9.10.11.12.13. [[/strikethrough]] 5. Carrigan: explain that in some states expert witness can give opinion. 6. Carrigan: requested more volume - not possible. Alexander will speak louder 7. Continue [[strikethrough]] cross [[/strikethrough]] direct-exam. Ingram- gets response from audience 8. Raynes: Tactics will use in Cross-exam. a) be wary b) will try to get witness to give info he needs. c) get in line of vision of jury. 9. Judge: explain "leading question" - cross exam to display Open - other side -