During cross-examination, what is the rule about conferring with a witness?

• A. You may confer with the witness at any time during cross-examination.
• B. You must not confer with any witness during cross-examination unless the cross-examiner consents or in special circumstances.
• C. You may confer with the witness only after cross-examination.
• D. You may confer with the witness during cross-examination only with the judge's permission.

Answer: (B)

During cross-examination, the order of things is that you must not confer with the witness unless specific limits apply. The idea is to prevent coaching or influencing the witness while questions are being put, so the testimony remains the witness’s own recollection and answer. The correct approach allows a conference only if the cross-examiner consents or in special circumstances. The cross-examiner’s consent gives control over whether a conference happens, maintaining fairness and the adversarial balance. Special circumstances cover those rare, limited situations where a brief conference is genuinely needed to handle a procedural issue or to clarify something without turning the cross-examination into a back-and-forth coaching session.

Options that let you confer freely, only allow conferring after cross-examination, or require the judge’s permission as the sole gatekeeper would undermine the purpose of the rule by either inviting coaching, delaying necessary clarification, or placing the court in a gatekeeping role whenever a conference might be useful.