Cross-examination of Richard H. Fox

📄 Cross-examination of Richard H. Fox — Wednesday, January 15, 1997

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CIVIL\1997\JAN\15\CROSS-EXAMINATION-OF-RICHARD-H.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 42 of 57

◀ Redirect examination of Richard H. Fox Re-redirect examination of Richard H. Fox ▶

Witness: Richard H. Fox
Examiner: Robert Baker
Called by: Plaintiff • Date: Wednesday, January 15, 1997 • Utterances: 8

A very brief redirect in which Medvene reads back a portion of MacDonell's prior testimony to clarify what Fox had been referring to in cross-examination. The exchange establishes that MacDonell admitted he did no actual physical testing of certain small items — only observation — because he feared fracturing them.

# 1 A:

That's what he said.

# 2 MR. BAKER:

I object. That's not accurate.

KEY QUOTE

# 3 MR. MEDVENE:

I'll read Your Honor from page 85, lines 14 through 20 of Mr. MacDonell's testimony.

# 4 Q:

It is true, sir, that you did -- they were so small, you were afraid of fracturing them; and because of that, you did no actual testing, only observation. Is that true, sir? Yes or no?

# 5 A:

Yes; that's what I did.

KEY QUOTE

# 6 Q:

So it's true you did not touch the balls?

# 7 A:

I did not, no.

# 8 Q:

(BY MR. MEDVENE) Is that what you were referring to?

KEY QUOTE

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (3)

Witness (Richard H. Fox)

Yes; that's what I did.

Confirms MacDonell's admission that he only observed the items and never touched them, reinforcing the point Medvene is building on redirect.

MR. BAKER

I object. That's not accurate.

Baker challenges Medvene's characterization of MacDonell's prior testimony, but Medvene responds by reading directly from the record.

MR. MEDVENE

Is that what you were referring to?

Closes the redirect by tying Fox's earlier statement to the specific passage from MacDonell's testimony.

Evidence (1)

Informal

MacDonell's prior testimony, page 85 lines 14-20, regarding not touching small items for fear of fracturing them

read into record to clarify Fox's prior statement

Notable Exchanges (1)

MR. BAKER•MR. MEDVENE

Baker objects that Medvene's reading of MacDonell's testimony is inaccurate; Medvene responds by citing the specific page and line numbers and reading directly from the transcript.

strategic

Credibility Attacks (1)

⚔ MacDonell

prior inconsistent statement / admission

Medvene uses MacDonell's own testimony to establish he performed no actual physical testing of the items in question — only visual observation — undermining the weight of his analysis.

Objections

1 objections (0 sustained, 0 overruled)

Proceeding 8817 • 8 utterances • Plaintiff witness

Civil Trial

Department 103