Can anyone simplify courtroom objections? I'm doing a mock trial in class. Simple please. Thanks!?
- Anonymous4 years agoFavorite Answer
A courtroom objection is for when you say the other side is not following a procedural rule.
A procedural rule is about *how* things are done.
For example, the rule against hearsay prevents one from asking a witness what somebody else said, as proof of what they said.
"What did Fred say?"
"He said he saw the accused commit the crime."
This is not admissible, and therefore objectionable, because one can't prove that the accused is guilty - a party cannot prove any point that is in issue - by asking someone, what someone else said, because that's against the rule against hearsay. If you want to put in evidence what Fred saw, or says he saw, you have to call Fred as a witness. That way both sides can question Fred directly.
That is an example of a procedural rule. Another example is that the person asking for the court to make an order - the plaintiff in a civil case, and the prosecution in a criminal case - must go first. They first have to put forward their evidence, and only then does the defendant have to respond. Because if their evidence does not meet the standard of proof, then the defendant has nothing to respond to. This is another way of saying that the party asking the court for an order, has the burden of proof.
You object in court if the other side is breaching a procedural rule.
It can't be simplified any more than that, because what you can object to, depends on knowing all the different procedural rules, which are complex.
- 4 years ago
you object to something being said or done in the courtroom that you find in violation of the rules.
the more rules you know, the more aware you will be of when and what to object
- 4 years ago
Here is a short story I made for you :3
- BobLv 74 years ago
If the Cops can't even be put in jail why would he be put in jail?