Knowledge about hiring a lawyer

“Questioning 101” legal information and practical techniques for asking basic questions that lawyers must know.

“Question 101” legal information and practical techniques in questioning. Basics that lawyers must know about questioning It is another job of a lawyer who represents in court that must be performed in almost every case.

However, in teaching whether at the bachelor’s degree level, the barrister’s degree level, or the Lawyers Council itself. There is often little teaching of how to ask questions correctly and in a practical way. The focus is more on studying for use in exams.

Today I will explain about asking questions. Emphasis is on theory. Including practical techniques To be used as a manual for the work of fellow lawyers.

What is questioning? 

Explaining what questioning is requires first understanding the system for questioning witnesses in court. which can be explained as follows 

Legal matters

Civil Procedure CodeSection 117

The party claiming the witness is entitled to question the witness as soon as the witness has taken an oath and presented himself in accordance with Sections 112 and 116, or if the court is the person to interrogate. Ask the witness first. Then the litigant can ask questions only after the court has finished asking questions.

When the party who must refer to the witness has finished questioning the witness. The other party is free to cross-examine the witness.

When you have finished cross-examining the witness. The litigant who claims the witness is free to ask questions.


Normally, when questioning witnesses, the questioning process is divided into 3 steps:


It is a question that the lawyer on the side who is claiming the witness will bring his own witness. Give evidence to the court and question your own witnesses so that the witnesses can testify to the facts as they wish. to support their own case This type of division is Questioning witnesses

การถามพยาน ตอนที่ 1 ” ซักถามพยาน ” – รวม 13 เคล็ดลับที่ทนายความต้องรู้ก่อนขึ้นถามพยานในชั้นศาล

2.Cross examination

is after the lawyer on the side who cited the witness has finished questioning. Lawyers on the opposing side will have the right to question such witnesses This is called cross-examination. The objective is to destroy the credibility of opposing witnesses. or to allow opposing witnesses to testify in a way that is beneficial to their case.

” ถามค้าน 101 ” – รวมพื้นฐาน 12 เทคนิคการถามค้าน ที่ทนายความต้องรู้ก่อนขึ้นว่าความ


is after the witness has testified in answer to the opposing side’s cross-examination. The lawyer on the side that claims the witness has the right to stand up and ask another question, called cross-examination, with the objective of Have the witness testify and explain the matter in response to the opposing attorney’s cross-examination. And whether there was any damage to the case or not is still unclear.

Objective of the inquiry

It is normal when we are lawyers and refer witnesses to testify in court. When he testified answering our questions was not difficult. Because we can rehearse or understand each other already.

But when the witness testifies in answer to the lawyer on the opposite side, or answering that objection Witnesses themselves may testify incorrectly and deviate from the truth. The testimony was not clear. The ambiguity of the testimony can be interpreted in many ways. or testify in a manner that may cause damage to our case.

This may occur for many reasons. For example, the witness is confused by the opposing lawyer’s question. The witness misunderstood the question. Startled or careless, causing an incorrect answer. Responding to the opponent’s lead question without thinking, answering too quickly, or not understanding the correct way to answer, etc.

Therefore, the law gives an opportunity to the lawyer on the side who claims the witness. Get up and ask another witness. It’s called questioning. In order for the witness to testify and explain the matter in answer to the cross-examination of the lawyer on the opposite side. To make it more accurate or clear.

So the purpose of the inquiry is as follows.

1. Have the witness testify and explain that What is the reason that the answer to the cross-examination question was incorrect from reality?

2. Let the witness testify and explain the questions that were not yet clearly answered. Vague or interpreted in many ways Or has the trend not ended yet?

Prohibition of asking questions

In asking questions, It’s not like lawyers want to ask any questions. But there are two important prohibitions:

Legal matters

Civil Procedure Code, Section 118
It is good for the litigant who claims the witness to question the witness. Or ask witnesses. The litigant is prohibited from using leading questions. unless the other party consents or receives permission from the court.

In the case where the party claiming the witness will question the witness. The litigant is prohibited from using any questions other than those related to the testimony of witnesses to answer cross-examination.


Do not use leading questions

Leading questions Refers to a question that introduces an answer to the witness, such as the question “

  • Yes or No
  • Is that right?
  • Is this correct?
  • It’s like this
  • Left or right
  • White or black


Or simply put, it’s a question that you can try just nodding your head or answering yes to.

This is because if the lawyer is allowed to ask and bring witnesses. It means that the witness does not have to answer anything. Simply answering what your own lawyer asks is enough. This will put the opponent at a great disadvantage.

So remember this when asking. Therefore, do not use leading questions. unless there is consent from the other party or permission from the court.

If we ask using leading questions. Strict courts will not record the answers of witnesses. Or when the opposing side makes an objection, the court will not record the answer as well.

You can only ask questions that the witness answers in cross-examination.

Because of the purpose of asking questions. This is to allow the witness to testify and explain the matters that answered the cross-examination questions incorrectly or were not clear as I explained from the beginning.

Therefore, the right to ask questions. Therefore, he has the right to ask questions only about matters that the witness has testified in response to cross-examination. There is no right to ask questions about other matters that are not related to what the witness testified in response to cross-examination. or ask to have the witness testify and explain a new matter.

If the law allows us to question witnesses about things other than matters that can be answered in cross-examination. It is equal to giving us the right to continually ask new questions from witnesses. This will put the opposing party at a disadvantage because they will not have another opportunity to cross-examine.

Tips and methods for asking questions

1.Listen and take notes as our witnesses answer cross-examination

While our witness was answering the opposing counsel’s cross-examination, We must continually listen and take note of what questions our witnesses answer.

If our witness gives false answers to cross-examination questions, Deviated from the facts contained in the expression. Or the answer is not clear or ambiguous and can be interpreted in many ways. We must note that the witness answered that question.

After that, when the cross-examination is finished, let us ask the witnesses. By trying to get the witness to explain his mistake as follows.

  • Have the witness explain: who answered the objection like that How do you understand the question?
  • Have the witness explain: The reason for answering the question like that What is the reason? Why?
  • Have the witness explain any answers that may be ambiguous or unclear. Can be interpreted in many ways The trend has not yet ended.

How if the witness answers well or clearly? It doesn’t cause damage or affect the picture of the case. We don’t always have to ask.

2.Start the question by repeating the answer

It’s normal to ask questions. We usually begin by repeating the witness’s answer to the opposing attorney’s cross-examination. to make the witness imagine that What is wrong with the answer?

Questioning By referring to the answer to the question, it also prevents problems that the opposing party will object to. The question is also not related to the cross question very well.

Example of asking questions

First example

In a murder case The prosecution witness testified in answer to the defense lawyer’s cross-examination that “On the day of the incident, the lights at the crime scene were very dark. The witness did not see the defendant at the time of the incident. This makes it doubtful whether this prosecution witness saw the defendant on the day of the incident or not.

Plaintiff’s lawyer may ask questions like this

The witness, the witness testified, answered the defendant’s lawyer in cross-examination, saying, “On the day of the incident, the lights at the crime scene were very dark. The witness did not see the defendant during the incident. “Then why do the witnesses confirm that the defendant committed the crime?

The witness may answer: “At the time of the incident, I did not see the defendant. But after the event is finished The defendant ran from the scene and ran past me. Saw the defendant holding a gun, so he was confident that the defendant was the one who caused the incident. “

This answer will make the damage caused by the witness answering cross-examination disappear.

Second example

In a murder case The defendant’s witness who is a witness confirming the defendant’s address. Testifying in response to the prosecutor’s cross-examination that “On the day of the incident, the defendant was unable to determine whether the witness was with the defendant or not,” which reduces the weight of the credibility of this witness.

Defense attorneys may ask questions like these

The witness testified in response to the prosecution prosecutor’s cross-examination that “The witness does not remember that Is the defendant with the witness? “How does the witness understand the question?”

The witness might answer, “I don’t remember if he was with me all day or not. So I answered like that. But at 2 p.m. At the time of the incident, he sat and played games with me until 5:00 p.m.”

Answers like this will make the witness’s testimony clearer and damage caused by cross-examination will be eliminated.

Third example. servitude cases The plaintiff argued that the use of the dispute was a discretionary use among relatives. therefore did not have the right to servitude But it appeared that the prosecution witness answered the defendant’s lawyer’s question that “Anyone can enter and exit the dispute,” which can be interpreted as saying Anyone can enter and exit the dispute. It is used in an opposing way.

The plaintiff’s lawyer may ask:

The witness testified in response to the plaintiff’s lawyer’s cross-examination that What does “anyone can enter and exit the dispute” mean?

The witness may answer: “The word “Who” I answered? Refers to relatives or close friends who know each other only. It does not refer to ordinary people who do not know each other.”

Answers like this make the witness’s testimony that is not clear and can be interpreted in many ways clearer and the damage caused by answering cross-examination is reduced.

3.Try to use why questions.

Normally, the content of the inquiry That is, having the witness testify and explain the matter in which he or she testified and answered incorrect or unclear questions in cross-examination. Therefore, it is best to use “why” questions, which are open-ended questions for the witness to explain.


  • Why would a witness testify in such a way?
  • Why did you confirm you saw the event?
  • Why are you sure the defendant is the perpetrator?


4. Do not use emotion or anger or watch the witness testify, it will make the witness go astray.

Ordinary. When a witness gives incorrect answers to cross-examination questions Deviated from reality It will make us feel upset that the witness gave incorrect testimony. We must try to suppress our anger. and talk with witnesses calmly

If we show more anger or look at a witness who gives an incorrect answer, it will cause the witness to become disoriented. And then testify even more errors. We should talk with the witness gradually, pointing out why the witness testified in error and the witness testified to correct it.


Questioning is one of the basic principles of a lawyer’s work that he will use throughout his life. Therefore, we should understand the correct way to ask questions. Both the objective Prohibited questions, how to ask, and practical techniques and tips.

Which I hope. This article on questioning will be very useful in working and representing in court. Of my lawyer friends

Express your opinion about this article


ทนายเอกสิทธิ์ ศรีสังข์

About ทนายเอกสิทธิ์ ศรีสังข์

ทนายความ/หัวหน้าสำนักงาน พิศิษฐ์ ศรีสังข์ ทนายความ ยินดีให้คำปรึกษากฎหมายและรับว่าความทั่วราชอาณาจักร โทร 098-2477807 , 087-3357764 ไลน์ id - @srisunglaw (มี @ข้างหน้า)

Related Posts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.