Also known as: redirect examinations · redirect-examination · re-direct examination · redirect exam
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A follow-up questioning of a witness by the party who called the witness, conducted after cross-examination and ordinarily limited to matters raised on cross-examination.
Roland Rhodes testified on direct that he saw the defendant at the scene. On cross-examination opposing counsel highlighted inconsistencies in his description of the lighting. On redirect examination Roland's counsel asked him to explain the conditions that affected his view, allowing the jury to assess the prior statements in context.
Rowan Russell testified on direct about contract negotiations. Cross-examination suggested bias from prior dealings. On redirect examination Rowan explained the context of those dealings to show they did not affect his account of the current agreement.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Ryan Roberts testified on direct about the timing of events. Cross-examination raised questions about a missing document. On redirect examination Ryan described how the document was prepared and why it was not produced earlier.
Ronald Reed testified on direct about product defects. Cross-examination impeached him with prior statements. On redirect examination Ronald reconciled the statements by explaining the different contexts in which they were made.
Rita Russell testified on direct about her observations. Cross-examination covered new topics outside the original direct. On redirect examination Rita's counsel was permitted to address only the new matters to clarify the record without reopening the entire testimony.
Ralph Richardson testified on direct about a confession. Cross-examination suggested coercion. On redirect examination Ralph explained the circumstances of the statement to restore the jury's confidence in its voluntariness.
Redirect examination is normally limited to matters first brought out during cross-examination. The calling party uses it to draw the sting of damaging points by giving the witness an opportunity to explain or qualify those points.
Redirect is ordinarily confined to issues raised on cross. A court may permit broader inquiry only in its discretion, and any new matters then become subject to recross.
The former testimony exception requires that the party against whom the testimony is offered had an opportunity to develop it by direct, cross, or redirect examination. Redirect therefore counts as one of the permitted methods of examination that satisfies the rule.
Redirect allows the calling party to rehabilitate a witness after cross-examination by refuting, explaining, or qualifying impeaching matter that emerged on cross.
…today? "A. No, sir. "Q. Not today? "A. No, sir. "Q. So you only had one drink today? "A. Yes, sir." On redirect examination, appellant's lawyer elicited the following: "Q. Leroy, isn't the real reason why you just had one drink today because you just had enough money to buy one drink? "A. Well, that was…