header-logo header-logo

A collaborative approach

17 April 2014 / Clive Freedman KC
Issue: 7603 / Categories: barrister , Features , Profession
printer mail-detail

Clive Freedman QC explains how teamwork underpins the foundations of a successful cross-examination

Lawyer, legislator and US Attorney General Benjamin Butler was regarded as one of the most skilled cross-examiners of his day. A particular case, turning on the capabilities of iron, led him to spend a week quite literally at the grindstone working in a railway repair workshop. When it comes to cross-examination, the metaphor of thinking outside the box assumes an altogether new meaning.

The popular portrayal of a witness crumbling and confessing tearfully all under the scrutiny of the barrister’s wit and masterful advocacy is, unfortunately, the stuff of fiction. Witnesses can be backed into a corner, but presentation in court is only part of the story. It is a common misconception that cross-examination is exclusively the barrister’s domain. It is important not to overlook the crucial ways in which solicitor and client can help prepare. Barrister, solicitor and client are members of a team bringing to it valuable and different perspectives.

Solicitors possess an unrivalled knowledge of the case.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll