Lawyers: What is the legal term in court when the attorney’s question calls for speculation by the witness?
Specifically, I’m talking about when the attorney’s question would require that the witness be able to read the mind of the person the attorney is asking about. The witness can’t do that so this question can be objected to or must be rephrased. Would Generic Cialis the other attorney say, "Objection: Calls for Speculation" ? Or is it some other term?
I’m currently dealing with an aggressive attorney who is treating me poorly, based on his assertion that he thinks I’m trying to do something. This is something I’ve never done before, never threatened to do, nor have contemplated doing because I recognize it would be a rule violation — not of law, but of a commercial agreement. We’re not in court at the moment, just negotiating. But most attorneys who are practiced in law should know not to make these kinds of accusations and assumptions as to what someone must be contemplating, and using that to justify their pre-emptive, punitive, and prejudicial behavior in a commercial contract for service
Thanks for the initial responses. Again, no crime has been committed, but a law firm is refusing me the usual unfettered access to their full base of 100 attorneys I have been paying for in a pre-paid legal insurance contract for legal consultations. As long as I don’t ask the same legal matter twice, they are obliged to give consultations. But what they’re trying to do is to THROTTLE me by saying I already asked about a certain legal matter in the past and they assert that my supposed reason for wanting full access to the full attorney base is to play "Peter against Paul" so to ask the same question twice but differently in an effort to pull a fast one on them. No! I am a very experienced documentation agent in commercial banking and know how to keep issues separate. I may have asked about the same PERSON in the past, but on an entirely different legal matter at a different time. They’re trying to say because it was the same PERSON, it is the same legal matter, and it isn’t.
It is called a "State of Mind" exception to the Hearsay Rule.
Hearsay is an out of court statement, used offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.
However, if the statement is used to describe the 3rd party declarant’s state of mind, then the statement can come in.
Concerning the attorney’s treatment of you, he is using a psychological tactic intended to intimidate you. Don’t let him intimidate you; you become the aggressor.
Or, hire an aggressive attorney yourself.
Good luck.
Leading the witness, or asking the witness to speculate, which is worthless in testimony.
Your own attorney needs to be on top of that, and call them on it when they do.
Such as "given this circumstance, do you think you might do this" is a ridiculous question to ask.
To prove the point, say "well, I could only speculate, but…" This will leave them looking stupid in the court transcripts.
Best luck.
However, if they are trying to prove you had intent to commit a crime, such as driving to your girlfriend’s house with a gun with the intent of shooting her (hopefully that’s not the case) then they have every right to ask you what you were planning to do, or to prove you had it planned before hand, and didn’t just fly off the handle with no preplanning (and coincidentally had a gun, a plastic bag, a rope, gloves and a disguise with you for the company christmas party).