Why do lawyers &quot;never&quot; call hostile witnesses for direct examination?
<p>In a novel version of "Perry Mason," the fictitious (mostly TV) lawyer called the actual perpetrator of the crime to the stand, as a direct witness because she had declined to testify for the prosecution (against Mason's client). Mason won the case with three questions:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Mason: Are you Martha Lavinia?<br>
  Witness: Yes.<br>
  Mason: Is this your signature on this letter?<br>
  Witness: Yes.<br>
  Mason: Please read the letter to the court.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>It incriminated her. </p>

<p>I understand that this tactic is highly unusual, to say the least. Perhaps it is because a lawyer can't impeach his own witness or ask leading questions, whereas he can do so on "cross."</p>

<p>On the other hand, if a lawyer couldn't get a key (hostile) witness on the stand, except in the "worst" way, why wouldn't he do so?</p>

<h3>Lawyers control hostile witnesses with leading questions.</h3>

<p>The reason Perry Mason's tactic worked in this example is because his only "real" question (<em>which actually wasn't a question at all as the below analysis explains</em>) was to read the letter. Since the contents of the letter were written, Mr. Mason knew exactly what the answer would be and, therefore, he had "control" over what the witness would say. <em>Same analysis also applies for the other two "questions."</em></p>

<p>As @cpast correctly points out in his comment, the rules allow <strong><em>direct examination</em></strong> of <strong><em>hostile witnesses</em></strong>. Witnesses are designated hostile by the judge in response to a request by the attorney who calls them for direct examination.</p>

<h3>Question Analysis</h3>

<p><strong>Question 1:</strong></p>

<ul>
<li><strong>Leading.</strong> <em>Are you Martha Lavinia?</em></li>
<li><strong>Not leading.</strong> <em>What is your name?</em></li>
</ul>

<p><strong>Question 2:</strong></p>

<ul>
<li><strong>Leading.</strong> <em>Is this your signature on this letter?</em></li>
<li><strong>Not leading.</strong> <em>Whose signature is on this letter?</em></li>
</ul>

<p><strong>Question 3:</strong></p>

<ul>
<li><strong>Not a question.</strong> <em>Please read the letter to the court.</em></li>
<li><strong>Question.</strong> <em>What does this letter say?</em></li>
</ul>

united-states trial