🦅
Federal Evidence • Examination of Witness
EVID#006
Legal Definition
Look for two verbs in the same question.
Plain English Explanation
A compound question is when someone asks you two things in one question. Like, "Did you eat your lunch and play with your toys?" Though they seem harmless enough, they can cause issues when used during an adversarial, high-stakes environment, like a legal trial. Why? Imagine if someone asked a defendant, "Did you eat breakfast this morning and reflect on the murder you committed?" The person may have indeed eaten breakfast, but answering "Yes" to the question also admits to reflecting on committing murder. By forcing questions to be asked independently, rather than combined, it helps prevent the witness from being confused while answering questions.
Hypothetical
Hypo 1: During a trial about a car accident, the lawyer asks Bob, "Did you stop at the red light and see the other car coming?" Bob answers yes, but it's unclear whether he stopped at the light or saw the car, or both. Result: This is a compound question because it combines two separate actions. The question should be split to get clear answers to each part.
Hypo 2: In a theft case, Sam, a store security officer, is asked, "Did you notice the suspect enter the store and take the merchandise?" Sam answers no, which could mean he didn't see the suspect enter, didn't see them take merchandise, or both. Result: This compound question could lead to confusion about what Sam actually witnessed, highlighting the need for questions to be more specific in legal settings.
Hypo 3: Bob, testifying in a contract dispute, is asked, "Did you sign the contract and understand the terms?" He answers yes, but it is unclear whether he means he signed the contract, understood the terms, or both. Result: The question is improperly compound, as it asks about two distinct actions, complicating the clarity of Bob's testimony.
Hypo 4: In a landlord-tenant dispute, Sam is asked, "Did you pay the rent on time and keep the apartment clean?" He answers no, which makes it unclear whether he didn't pay on time, didn't keep the apartment clean, or both. Result: This illustrates a failure in questioning, where each part should be addressed separately to avoid ambiguity.
Hypo 5: Bob is asked, "Did you drive to work today?" Result: This question is not compound as it only contains one verb and asks about a single action, demonstrating a properly formed question in a legal context.
Hypo 2: In a theft case, Sam, a store security officer, is asked, "Did you notice the suspect enter the store and take the merchandise?" Sam answers no, which could mean he didn't see the suspect enter, didn't see them take merchandise, or both. Result: This compound question could lead to confusion about what Sam actually witnessed, highlighting the need for questions to be more specific in legal settings.
Hypo 3: Bob, testifying in a contract dispute, is asked, "Did you sign the contract and understand the terms?" He answers yes, but it is unclear whether he means he signed the contract, understood the terms, or both. Result: The question is improperly compound, as it asks about two distinct actions, complicating the clarity of Bob's testimony.
Hypo 4: In a landlord-tenant dispute, Sam is asked, "Did you pay the rent on time and keep the apartment clean?" He answers no, which makes it unclear whether he didn't pay on time, didn't keep the apartment clean, or both. Result: This illustrates a failure in questioning, where each part should be addressed separately to avoid ambiguity.
Hypo 5: Bob is asked, "Did you drive to work today?" Result: This question is not compound as it only contains one verb and asks about a single action, demonstrating a properly formed question in a legal context.
