In a rebuttal, which examination follows the witness being called again?

In a rebuttal, which examination follows the witness being called again?

• A. Direct examination
• B. Cross-examination
• C. Rebuttal examination
• D. Further redirect examination

Answer: (A)

In a rebuttal, the examination that follows a witness being called again is typically referred to as direct examination. This phase occurs after a witness has already undergone cross-examination and is presented back to the court by the party that originally called them. The purpose of this direct examination during rebuttal is to clarify or counter any points made during the opposing party's cross-examination. The witness might provide additional information or testify to specific details that were raised as an issue in the cross-examination process. In the structure of courtroom testimony, direct examination is the initial questioning of a witness by the party that called them, while cross-examination occurs when the opposing party questions that witness. The rebuttal, therefore, is not a new form of examination but rather a return to the original format, allowing for further clarification and reinforcement of key points made by the witness in support of the calling party's case.

In a rebuttal, the examination that follows a witness being called again is typically referred to as direct examination. This phase occurs after a witness has already undergone cross-examination and is presented back to the court by the party that originally called them. The purpose of this direct examination during rebuttal is to clarify or counter any points made during the opposing party's cross-examination. The witness might provide additional information or testify to specific details that were raised as an issue in the cross-examination process.

In the structure of courtroom testimony, direct examination is the initial questioning of a witness by the party that called them, while cross-examination occurs when the opposing party questions that witness. The rebuttal, therefore, is not a new form of examination but rather a return to the original format, allowing for further clarification and reinforcement of key points made by the witness in support of the calling party's case.