1
Q: Patrick, did you hear anything from the Krusty Krabs workers about who stole the secret formula?
A: Yeah-huh! Everyone told me they saw Sandy hanging around the restaurant on the night of the theft!
Hearsay: Witness is testifying about what other people said, not what they personally saw or heart.
Sustained. The witness may not testify about hearsay statements unless they fall under an exception.
Q: Patrick, you searched Plankton's bag without a warrant, didn't you?
A: Uh, yeah, so what?
Leading. The question suggests the answer to the witness.
Sustained. The question should be rephrased.
Q: Patrick, how often do you eat at the Krusty Krab?
A: 46 times a day! It's how I stay in such great shape.
Irrelevant. Witness's work experience has nothing to do with the facts or issues of this case.
Overruled. It's relevant by showing their likelihood of being present to witness the crime.
Q: Patrick, when and where did you search Plankton's backpack and what did you find inside?
A: Yesterday, in the Chum Bucket, and I found the missing formula inside!
Multiple questions. The question contains three questions in one.
Sustained. Break it up into multiple questions.
Q: Squidward, how did Plankton react when you gave them a menu?
A: Happy. Grateful. They said they needed it for a "school project." Whatever.
Speculative. The question asks the witness to guess or assume something that is not based on their personal knowledge.
Overruled. The question is not speculative because it asks the witness to describe their personal observation and perception of Plankton's reaction.
Q: Patrick, did you follow proper procedure when you searched Plankton's backpack?
A: Yes, I did! Was that bad?
Vague. The question is unclear or ambiguous about what constitutes the proper procedure.
Sustained. The question is vague and should be more specific.
Q: Spongebob, what are your favorite hobbies?
A: Oh, I LOVE jellyfishing and blowing bubbles!
Irrelevant. Favorite hobbies have nothing to do with the case.
Sustained. This information is immaterial to this case.
Q: Squidward, why did you lie to Plankton about having permission to use the secret formula?
A: I did not lie to Plankton! I had permission from Mr. Krabs!
Vague. The question is unclear or ambiguous about when and how the witness lied to Jordan Klein.
Overruled. The question is not vague because it refers to a specific statement that the witness made to Plankton.
Q: Squidward, do you think Mr. Krabs gave you permission to use the formula?
A: Yes. Of course, he did. Why wouldn't he?
Improper opinion. The witness is giving an opinion that is not based on their expertise, personal knowledge, or perception.
Overruled. The witness may give an opinion on what they understood or believed from their conversation with Mr. Krabs.
Q: Squidward, you lied to Mr. Krabs about having permission to use the secret formula, correct?
A: Of course, I didn't!
Leading. The question suggests that Squidward is a liar.
Overruled. The question is not leading because it challenges the witness's credibility.
Q: Patrick, did you have a warrant to search Plankton's backpack?
A: No way! I had reasonable suspicion.
Q: Are you sure you didn't need a warrant?
Asked and answered. The question has already been asked
Sustained. The question is asked and answered and should not be repeated.
Q: Spongebob, what would have happened if the formula had fallen into the wrong hands?
A: It would be a disaster! It's secret for a reason, it has all the ingredients and other factual info!
Speculative. The question asks the witness to guess or assume something that is not based on their personal knowledge.
Sustained. The question is speculative and calls for an opinion that is not based on facts or evidence.
Q: Squidward, did you steal the formula?
A: No!
Q: So, you're a thief and a liar, aren't you!?
Badgering the witness. The question is hostile, aggressive, or repetitive with the witness.
Sustained. The question is badgering the witness and should be stopped.
Q: Spongebob, how often do you check the vault for the secret formula?
A: Why, I check it eeeevery day! Aha-aaa-a-aaah!
Vague. The question is unclear or ambiguous about what constitutes checking the laptops.
Overruled. The question is not vague because it can be understood in its ordinary sense.
Q: Spongebob, did you notice anything unusual or suspicious on the day of the theft?
A: No, not really. Should I have?
Multiple questions. The question contains two questions in one.
Overruled. The question is not multiple because it asks about the same subject matter and can be answered with a single response.
Q: Squidward, did you tell Plankton that you had permission to use the secret formula and did you give it to them yesterday?
A: No! I would never do that.
Multiple Questions. Two in one.
Overruled. The question is not multiple because it asks about the same transaction or occurrence and can be answered with a single response.
Q: Patrick, do you think Plankton is guilty of stealing the formula?
A: Yes, for sure!
Improper opinion. The witness is giving an opinion that is not based on their expertise, personal knowledge, or perception.
Sustained. The witness may not give an opinion on the ultimate issue of guilt or innocence.
Q: Squidward, did you give the formula to Plankton yesterday?
A: I did not and never would!
Q: When did you give the formula to Plankton?
Asked and answered. The question has already been asked and answered by the witness.
Overruled. The question is not asked and answered because it asks for a different detail than the previous question.
Q: Spongebob, do you think Plankton is a good guy.
A: I know he is deep down!
Improper opinion. The witness is giving an opinion that is not based on their expertise, personal knowledge, or perception.
Sustained. The witness may not give an opinion on the character or reputation of the defendant.
Q: Patrick, you are a security expert, right?
A: Duh. Yeah.
Q: So, you know how to access secret information, right?
A: Yes, I do!
Q: So, you taught Plankton how to access the secret formula, right?
Badgering the witness. The question is hostile, aggressive, or repetitive with the witness.
Overruled. The question is not badgering the witness because it is a cross-examination question that challenges or impeaches the witness’s testimony.
Q: Patrick, what do you think Plankton was going to do with the secret formula?
A: Eat it. No, wait! Sell it? Maybe use it to blow his nose?
Speculative: The question asks the witness to guess or assume something that is not based on their personal knowledge.
Sustained. The question is speculative and calls for an opinion that is not based on facts or evidence.
Q: Spongebob, did you see Plankton in the Krusty Krab yesterday?
A: Definitely not!
Q: Are you sure you did not see him in the Krusty Krab yesterday?
Asked and answered. The question has already been asked
Sustained. The question is asked and answered and should not be repeated.
Q: Mr. Spongebob, did you give permission to anyone to use the secret formula yesterday?
A: Goodness, no! In fact, I got a text from Mr. Krabs that morning, reminding me to keep it secure at all times.
Hearsay. The witness is testifying about what Mr. Krabs said in a text, not what they personally saw or heard.
Overruled. The text is not hearsay because it's a business record made in the regular course of business.
A: Why, yes I am! AaaAaa--aaa--Ahh!
Leading. The question suggests that this is Spongebob's fault.
Overruled. The question isn't leading because it's an introduction questions that establishes a fact that's not in dispute.
Q: Squidward, do you have any criminal record?
A: My record is as clean as a whistle!
Irrelevant. The witness's criminal record is not related to the facts or issues of this case.
Sustained. The witness's criminal record is prejudicial to this case.