If the opposite party doesn’t object then this bad question gets asked and answered which is Injustice, because it’s bias etc even though everyone in the room may have heard the bad question.
but the lawyer just didn’t object and the judge should step in and say to ask the question differently but instead they just allow this injustice question I don’t understand why.
Update: ok thank you I realized that people say it’s not the judge’s job now this doesn’t solve the problem and if they ask bad questions they need to be told these are bad questions instead of just consistently making the other person object because these bad questions will get through eventually unless you do a million objections I just feel like this is quite suboptimized it should be everyone in the room saying objection if they hear about question not just the other team if I sew a criminal and the police officer I wouldn’t just leave it up to the police officer to capture the criminal I’d point to the criminal and say this is a criminal
In: Economics
It is the job of the attorney to object and explain why they object.
The judge is not going to do the work for either side.
Objecting is important even if the judge doesn’t grant the objection, because it preserves the issue for appeal.
Latest Answers