对专家的交叉检查--既然可以刺杀，为什么还要刺杀。
照片。 我和我在全世界最好的朋友Shellie在她的婚礼上的相框照片。 坐在我的书柜里.
序幕。
谢莉：我对《摔死鬼》上瘾了。 你是对的。
K3：我知道--这不是很有趣吗。
谁会想到呢。
K3：这是一个如此可笑的概念，但执行得如此出色。
Shellie: 我喜欢她在得分时将头发拨到肩上的样子。
K3：你上午拿到箱子，下午就去试。
谢莉：太有娱乐性了。
K3：我喜欢在交叉询问中只需要几句话就能把证人撕碎。 事实上，她启发我改变了我做交叉询问的方式。 现在我不再啄食专家，而是直接进入主题。 当然，同时还要表现出完全的可爱和迷人。
案例研究。
我在一个处理损害赔偿的石棉案件中担任联合律师。 辩方正在介绍其经济专家。 通常情况下，这不是审判中的一个真正的亮点。 我正在听律师对证人进行资格审查。 以前从未遇到过这个证人。 对他几乎一无所知。 这里是直接陈述的开始。 我把引起我注意的字句标出来了。
82
16 DIRECT EXAMINATION
17 BY MR. WOOD:
18 Q. Good afternoon.
19 A. Good afternoon.
20 Q. State your name and address.
21 A. Mark Newton. And my address here in Seattle
22 is 1601 Fifth Avenue, Seattle 98101.
23 Q. And why are you here?
24 A. I'm here to testify regarding the economic
25 damages of the plaintiffs in this case.
83
1 Q. Could you give me a brief summary of your
2 educational background?
3 A. Well, I went to college for one quarter at UC
4 Santa Barbara back in 1970. And then I transferred to
5 UCLA later that year. And then graduated with a
6 degree in economics in 1974. And that's basically it.
7 So I have a degree in economics.
8 In terms of education after that, I did
9 that to take some additional accounting courses after
10 graduating to qualify to sit at the CPA exam.
11 Q. Okay. And you are presently licensed as a
12 CPA in the state of Washington, is that correct?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Okay. Why don't you give me a brief overview
15 of your professional background?
16 A. Sure. Yeah. Well, I have worked for this
17 company HSNO. I began in that -- in those initial --
18 it wasn't that when I started. It was accounting
19 under the name of the founder of the firm back then.
20 Anyway so I have worked technically for the same
21 company since 1974. Since I graduated from UCLA. And
22 so generally my work has been in forensic accounting
23 and economics. And I became a CPA.
24 I do a lot of work in cases like this,
25 where we are talking about economic damage on what I
84
1 would call personal economic cases. I personally do
2 wrongful death. We also do a significant amount of
3 work and other commercial types of disputes in courts.
4 So contract disputes. Other damages. Unfair business
5 practices, wherever we are evaluating the effects of
6 business from some alleged action. And in terms --
7 basically in terms of property damage. And then I
8 also do quite a large cases involving (inaudible)
9 cases, where somebody is concerned that someone who is
10 managing a business, for instance, may have been
11 misusing the assets of the business. So we get
12 involved in tracing that kind of work.
13 And then the last category, generally
14 speaking is we do a lot of work on insurance claims.
15 So these would be fires, floods, hurricanes, things of
16 that nature. And we help determine how much --
17 usually, usually business interruption type lawsuits
18 would be paid under an insurance policy.
19 Q. And you may have said this and I missed it,
20 but what does HSNO stand for?
21 A. Well, Hagen, Streiff, Newton & Oshiro.
22 Q. And that's the name of the company you are
23 working at?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And have you ever taught any courses?
85
1 A. Well, I have taught -- in essence, yes. I
2 have taught a lot of classes over the years, usually
3 in the context of seminars at conferences. So usually
4 professional organizations. And I address certain
5 topics in those cases, yes.
6 Q. And I think you mentioned you have been
7 qualified to testify as an expert in courts of law
8 before, is that correct?
9 A. Yes, I have.
10 Q. Which courts?
11 A. Well, primarily -- actually this was the
12 first chance I have had to testify in the state of
13 Washington. But I testified very often in California.
14 I started off my career in California and I have been
15 here for about 9 years. And just hadn't had this
16 opportunity for that time. But I testified at scores
17 of times in California. Testified in federal court
18 cases in Nevada, Ohio. Where else have I testified
19 at? I have testified before the International Trade
20 Commissioner in the late '80s. I even testified in a
21 case in Seoul, Korea.
22 Q. And you have been retained on occasion for --
23 as an expert for plaintiffs in personal injury
24 lawsuits, is that true?
25 A. Yes.
86
1 Q. But when it comes to asbestos lawsuits have
2 you been retained by plaintiff/defendants?
3 A. Always on the defense on asbestos cases we
4 have just -- over the years it's evolved where we work
5 for only the defendants.
6 Q. What's the hourly rate you charge for your
7 testimony?
8 A. For my testimony it's $450 per hour.
9 Q. Okay. And could I ask you that when you give
10 your opinions for me here today, that you do so with a
11 reasonable degree of scientific certainty?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And you agree that you will give me opinions
14 that are more likely than not true?
15 A. Yes.
这位专家看起来非常专业。 他穿着一套华丽的定制西装，让我的西装感到羞愧。 他神态自若，信心十足，对精心编排的导演工作进行得如此流畅感到满意。
现在跳过20多页的证词和他的意见的铺垫。
是时候来个 "死神 "时刻了。 我召唤出Drop Dead Diva的角色并接近证人。 让我们首先打破所有盘问规则，以一个开放性的问题作为开端。
108
13 诘问
14 KOEHLER女士： 15 问：你能不能--对不起，你能不能告诉我你的经济学学位 16？KOEHLER:
15 问：你能 -- 对不起，你能告诉我你在经济学方面的学位
，你的学位是什么？
17 答：是经济学文学士学位。
18 问：因此，当律师要求你在
19 的科学确定性范围内作证时，你没有能力
20 这样做，是吗？
21 答：嗯--
22 问：你不是一个科学家？
23 答：我不会称自己为科学家，但
24 我会称自己为法证经济学家。
25 问：所以让我重复我的问题。 律师问
109
1 你是否所有的意见都是基于科学
2 的确定性，而你无法证明这个
3 水平，我是否正确？
4 答：我不记得这是否是问我的确切问题
5。 但我认为就什么而言，
6 我 --
7 问：我只是问了你一个非常具体的问题。
好吧，我不记得这是否是准确的
9问题和答案。
10 问：假设这是向你提出的确切问题，
11。 你是否告诉陪审团，你所有的
12 意见都是在一定程度的
13 科学确定性内做出的？ 假设这个问题是
14，而你说是。
这是否是对你向这个
16 陪审团提供意见的能力的不正确陈述？
17 答：如果在你的假设下，那是所问的
18 问题，而那是我回答的方式，
19 是。 我不认为我可以肯定地回答
20 什么是更多或更少的可能性。 我认为这是我的
21 答案，但我很抱歉（听不清）。
转身，大摇大摆地离开，把头发甩到肩上......然后再继续进行其余的交叉，其中当然包括再提醒一下他一出场就被刺得多厉害。
113
17 问：这就是你对陪审团说的
18 是指工资损失和收入潜力损失是
19 相同的？
20 答：在本案中，是的。
21 问：好的。 好吧，这是一个假设，你
22 正在做。
23 答：我不认为这是一个假设。 这是一个
24 的结论，是我的看法，即在本案中，这将是
25 的情况。
114
1 问：你的意见是基于什么
2 -- 什么 -- 你的意见的基础是什么？
3 什么是--你的意见的专业性是什么
4，以便我们知道该怎么称呼它？ 你是否同意，
5 它没有达到科学的水平。 它是什么？ [眼睛睁大，向 陪审团耸肩 ]
6 先生。WOOD：反对，含糊不清。
7 A. 嗯......
8 法庭：好吧，如果你理解它，
9 你可以回答它。
10 A. 是的。 我认为--当你抛出
11 科学方法的说法时，我不
12 清楚你这句话的意思。
13 问：（科勒女士）好吧，我没有想出
14，是你的律师想出来的。
15 法庭：好的。你知道，你需要一个
16 问题，好的。
17 MS.好的，对不起，法官大人，
18。
19 问：（科勒女士）问题是：什么
20程度的--你的证词是什么，你的
21意见是什么，它被称为什么？ 这只是一个更
22 可能比不可能的意见，还是你有某种
23 方式来做你的意见，你希望我们考虑
24？
25 答：嗯，这是我的--对不起。
115
1 先生。WOOD：反对，含糊不清。
2 法庭：你是否觉得你可以回答
3 问题？
4 证人：我认为我可以。
5 法庭：请继续。
6 A. 好吧，我认为我的基本前提是
7 正在使用的是 "可能性大于非可能性"。