criminal-law court testimony
Are leading-witness rules applied equally to prosecution and defence?
<p><strong>Preamble</strong></p>
<p>I'm a scientist, not a lawyer, so please excuse this if it's obvious.</p>
<p><strong>Background</strong></p>
<p>In watching <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_v._Chauvin" rel="nofollow noreferrer">the Chauvin trial</a>, I've noticed that the defence lawyer tends to ask questions by stating the desired answer and then saying &quot;right?&quot;. And, sometimes, it seems that he follows a series of things that are easily agreed to, with the question he really wants to have answered in his favour. I notice that witnesses can sometimes be lulled into answering &quot;yes&quot; by the initial questions and then (am I imagining this) being tricked into answering &quot;yes&quot; to the final question in the sequence.</p>
<p>When the prosecution employs a similar pattern, there is usually an objection about leading the witness, and it's usually sustained.  But I don't tend to hear such objections when the defence does it.</p>
<p><strong>Question.</strong></p>
<p>Is this a normal pattern? If so, why? I can think of some reasons, e.g. (1) a preference to lean towards defence, so the state does not clobber citizens, (2) a choice of the prosecution not to appear to be bullying, (3) a pattern in this one trial, not reflective of others and (4) my misconception of events.</p>

<p>This is normal. It only seems imbalanced because only the prosecutor has been able to call witnesses so far.</p>
<p>Under <a href="https://www.revisor.mn.gov/court_rules/ev/id/611/" rel="noreferrer">Minnesota Rule of Evidence 611</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Ordinarily leading questions should be permitted on cross-examination. When a party calls a hostile witness, an adverse party, or a witness identified with an adverse party, interrogation may be by leading questions.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>At this point, only the prosecution has put on its witnesses, so it hasn't had an opportunity cross examine anyone, and the defense has been able to lead because it has only been able to cross examine.</p>
<p>Were the prosecutor to call the defendant's wife or mother or something like that, he would probably be permitted to use leading questions. And when the defense puts on its case, the roles will reverse: the defense attorneys will have to use open-ended questioning for any witness he calls, and the prosecutor will be able to use leading questions.</p>
