Viewing page 89 of 97

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 -