Leading Question

This objection is made when counsel asks a leading question during direct examination.
A leading question is a question which actually suggests an answer. Leading question
are allowed during cross examination, but not during direct.

Example: “At 8 pm that day, you were at the deli, correct?”

Compound Question
This objection is made when counsel asks a compound question. A compound question
is a question that actually asks multiple things, all linked by “and” or “or”.

Example: “Did you determine the time of death by interviewing witnesses and by
requesting the autopsy report written by the coroner?”

Question Calls for Narrative/Narrative Answer

This objection is made when either a witness begins telling a narrative as part of their
answer, or counsel’s question calls for a narrative. It is admissible for a witness to testify
about what happened, but they must do so in response to a question. This objection
exists to prevent long winded witness answers. If a witness has answered the question,
but continues telling a story, this objection should be made.

Example: “First thing I did that was get up, and go to work. It was fairly normal day at
work until the robbery, which happened at around 1 pm. After that the police came, and
began interviews. I was taken to the station, and was there until around 10 pm. After
this, I came back home….”

Argumentative Question
This objection is made when counsel begins arguing with a witness, badgering a
witness or becoming overly aggressive. This objection is made by an attorney to protect
a witness during cross examination. The objection is fairly subjective in terms of what is
considered argumentative. Generally, a judge will allow more aggressive questioning if
counsel is cross examining the defendant.

Example: “How can you sit here and lie to the court about your attitude towards
the victim?”

Asked and Answered Question

This objection is made when counsel has asked a question and received an answer,
and asks the same question again. If an answer is given, a new question must be
asked. Counsel can ask a question multiple times if the witness is not giving a full
answer, is being uncooperative or unresponsive.

Example: “Did you stop at the stop sign on 5th and Main?”, “No”, “So, to be clear, you
ran the stop sign?”

Vague and Ambiguous Question/Answer

This objection is made when either the question asked or answer given is vague and
ambiguous in nature. This objection can be used to help a witness answer a confusing
question, or help an attorney get a more precise response.

Example: “When did you see it happen?”

Non-Responsive Answer
This objection is made when a witness does not answer the question being asked by
the attorney. This objection can help an attorney corral the witness and get a straight
answer to questions the witness may be trying to avoid. Be careful to avoid making this
objection when the witness simply gives a different answer than what was expected or
desired.

Example: “Weren’t you the last person the victim saw on the night of his death?”, “I had
nothing to do with that!”
Estimating your chance of getting into a college is not easy in today’s competitive
environment. Thankfully, with our state-of-the-art software and data, we can analyze
your academic and extracurricular profile and estimate your chances.

Objections to Testimony
The second type of objection is an objection regarding the substance of the testimony or
evidence being presented. An attorney makes this type of objection to try and exclude
the information given by the witness from the trial. An attorney may desire to keep out
certain evidence or testimony for several reasons. For example, it may detrimental to
the case, it may be false and unverifiable, or it may simply be inadmissible in court.
Substantive objections are generally more difficult to make, and require more legal
understanding on the part of the attorney. The following are the most common
substantive objections in mock trial:

Relevance of Answer/Question
This objection is made when an attorney believes that irrelevant evidence to the case is
being brought up. There are several reasons why irrelevant evidence should be
excluded. Primarily, it contributes nothing to the case, it may sometimes reflect
negatively on either side, and it also wastes precious time which should be used to
tackle the real questions. An attorney can object to an irrelevant question asked by
opposing counsel, or to an answer which is either in parts, or altogether, irrelevant. Use
discretion with this objection, and don’t overuse, as what is relevant can be highly
subjective.

Example: “The victim’s favorite color was yellow, wasn’t it?”

Question Lacks Foundation

This objection is made when opposing counsel asks a question before establishing
foundation for that question. If the objection is sustained, the judge will require counsel
to “lay a foundation” which involves backtracking and asking a more general question.
This objection is most often encountered while describing circumstances during direct
examination. Often attorneys will cut foundational questions at the start of examination
in an effort to save time, so this is where most of the objections will be made.

Example: “What did you see at the Broadway diner?” (No previous question asking
about witnesses location, position, etc.)

Lacks Personal Knowledge/Speculation

This objection is made when either an attorney asks the witness a question of which
they have no personal knowledge, or when a witness begins to testify about something
they have not directly observed (speculation). Witnesses are only allowed to testify
about their own direct experiences and thoughts. Testifying as to what they believe may
have happened, or about another person’s state of mind, are all considered improper
evidence. The only exception in mock trial is that expert witnesses, or those who are
called to the stand because of particular knowledge or experience, are usually given
greater exemption from this objection. It would not be speculation for a signature
authenticator to testify the defendant is guilty of fraud based on that expert’s analysis
and professional opinion.

Example: The witness hears a gunshot from around a corner, runs, and sees the victim
dead, and the defendant holding a gun. The following is speculation: “I believe the
defendant shot the victim”.

Creation of a Material Fact

This objection is made when an attorney believes that a witness has made a factual
error in their testimony regarding the case. This objection can also be applied if a
question is extends past the scope of the witness’ statement and that it “calls for the
creation of a material fact by the witness”. Generally, this objection should only be used
as a last resort, and for major factual missteps. If the witness makes a minor error
without huge significance to the case, this can be brought up during cross examination;
the word “material” in the title of the objection suggests that this objection should only
be used for errors that are relevant and meaningful for the case at hand. Additionally,
 even if a witness tells a significant falsehood on the stand, it will always be better to take
up the issue on cross examination, and impeach the witness through the use of their
own witness statement. The effect of this is twofold, in that the witness is shown to have
lied, and the judge sees the greater skill of the crossing attorney. The CMF objection
should be made in the situation when an attorney believes they will have insufficient
time for cross examination, or in the case they believe a more immediate and forceful
course of action is necessary.

Example: “I was home with my girlfriend until 7 pm on Saturday”, “But in your witness
statement, didn’t you state you were home only until 6 pm?”

Improper Character Evidence

This objection is made when improper character evidence has been given as testimony
in court. Improper character evidence is when character evidence (think general
personality traits) is used to show how a person acted in a specific situation. There are
three exceptions to this rule in which this kind of character evidence is permissible:

 If this evidence is offered by the defense and applied to the character and actions of the
defendant to prove innocence, it is admissible.
 If this evidence is offered by the defense and applied to the character and actions of the
victim to prove innocence, it is admissible.
 If this evidence is offered to show dishonesty or a tendency to lie by any witness, it is
admissible. In this situation, the opposing counsel may rebut with positive character
evidence to show the contrary.

Example: “The defendant was always rude to me, and particularly so on the day of the
murder.”

Lay Witness Opinion

This objection is made when lay witnesses (witnesses who are not qualified as experts
and do not personal experience), testify with personal inferences or subjective
statements. Opinion testimony is only admissible when it is based on
perceptions/observations made with the witness’s five senses, and is helpful to clearer
understanding of the witness’s testimony. This objection is similar to Lacks Personal
Knowledge/Speculation, and sometimes can be used interchangeably.

Example: “I believe the defendant was in a crazed state of mind.”

Hearsay
This objection is made when a witness testifies about a statement made by another
person, and uses contents of the other person’s statement to prove a fact true or false.
This kind of testimony is considered hearsay because the actual declarant of the
statement in question is neither under oath on the stand, nor will be cross examined.
Therefore, hearsay is considered unreliable and inadmissible except in limited
circumstances. Because of several exceptions to the hearsay rule, this objection is often
the most difficult for new attorneys to understand. The following are some of the more
common exceptions in which hearsay is allowed for the truth of the matter:

Declaration against interest: Hearsay is allowed if the statement in question is against

the declarant’s economic, legal, criminal, civil or general interests.

Excited utterance: Hearsay is allowed if the statement in question is made by the

declarant during or shortly after a startling event from which the declarant is still
influenced, and describes or explains said event.

State of mind: Hearsay is allowed if the statement in question reveals the declarant’s
state of mind, emotional or physical condition at the time of the statement.

Records made in the regular course of business: Hearsay is allowed if the statement in
question was made in the form of a record in the regular course of a business or
government procedure.
Prior inconsistent statement: Hearsay is allowed if the statement in question is
inconsistent with the declarant’s trial testimony

Reputation of a person’s character in the community: Hearsay is allowed if the

statement in question is evidence of a person’s reputation or character within a
community or group.

Dying declaration: Hearsay is allowed if the statement in question was made by a dying
person about their cause or circumstances of death, with the declarant’s personal
knowledge and a sense of impending death.

Admission by party opponent: Hearsay is allowed if the statement in question was made
by a person, and is being offered against that person by an opposing party during trial.

One of the key points regarding hearsay in mock trial that is often overlooked is the
precise definition of what makes another person’s statement inadmissible. Another
statement is only hearsay if it is being offered for the truth of the matter. If a witness is
testifying to another’s statement, not to show that it is true, but instead, for example, to
justify a subsequent action, then the testimony is not hearsay and does not require an
exception to the hearsay rule. When dealing with statements of witnesses other than
their own, attorneys must be very careful, and must be prepared to defend the
testimony against opposing hearsay objections.

A judge will also be more likely to entertain arguments for and against a substantive
objection, so attorneys must be ready to respond to a judge’s questions with sound,
legal analysis. If an attorney strongly believes that a judge has not given them a fair
opportunity to explain their objection, or to respond to an opposing objection, it is
reasonable to ask, “May I be heard your Honor?”, or “May I respond to the objection
your Honor?”. If the judge denies the request, the attorney should move on but take
note of the preference and avoid asking again.
The key to mastering objections in mock trial is learning how to make objections and
how to defend against them. Both of these skills can be improved through practice. At
all times during team practice, attorneys should pay attention and listen for possible
objections. Similarly, attorneys must be prepared to scrutinize their own direct and cross
examinations and be ready to defend against any possible objections raised by
opposing counsel. Objections may seem stressful at first, but they are genuinely one of
the most fun and rewarding aspects of the attorney experience. Objections help keep a
trial dynamic, and allow attorneys to think on their feet and show of their legal arguing
skills. If an attorney takes the time to practice and master this facet of mock trial, the
returns will be exponential, both in terms of team performance and personal satisfaction
during competition.