Misleading Question

Example (taken from a real case)

A man is on trial for attacking another driver with a baseball bat during a road rage incident. The victim testifies that the man got out of the car and struck him repeatedly with a bat. The defense attorney asks the victim what happened after the man “tapped” him with the bat. This is a misleading question, as the attorney is suggesting without evidence that the defendant merely tapped the witness rather than striking him, as the witness had testified. This misleading question serves to downplay the defendant’s culpability while trivializing the witness’s allegations, without any basis in evidence.

Case Examples

• Misleading questions in the context of ineffective assistance of counsel: Criminal defendants will often use a lawyer's failure to object to questions they consider misleading as a basis for a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel. For example, in Williams v. Inch, No. 3:18CV638-LC-MJF, 2020 WL 6121486, at *8 (N.D. Fla. Sept. 10, 2020), report and recommendation adopted, No. 3:18CV638-LC-MJF, 2020 WL 6120460 (N.D. Fla. Oct. 16, 2020), Williams, an inmate previously convicted of grand theft, claimed that his lawyer had provided ineffective assistance of counsel. He argued that the lawyer had failed to object to misleading questions regarding a painter named Jay, who was supposedly involved in the case. Id.. However, the court ruled that Williams' counsel did not provide ineffective assistance of counsel in failing to object to these questions. It found that the identity of the painter was established by other witnesses and evidence, not by the defendant himself, as the defendant did not testify in his own defense. Id..
• Misleading questions in the context of depositions: When dealing with the deposition, parties are not required to give additional answers to misleading or confusing questions. For example, in In re Folding Carton Antitrust Litig., 83 F.R.D. 132, 134 (N.D. Ill. 1979), the court found that many of the questions asked by one party to another lacked clarity and purpose to the point at which they were misleading and that when the deponent's lawyer objected to these questions, the attorney conducting the deposition became argumentative. Id.. Therefore, the court found that the deponent did not violate discovery and would not be sanctioned for failing to answer the questions, as their attorney had properly objected to them as misleading. Id..