Blog

We’ve seen it in the movies. A cross-examination where an attorney seeks to identify weaknesses in an opposing side’s conclusions by questioning a witness. Often an entire case can hinge on a cross-examination. As opposed to direct examination, where the exchange between lawyer and witness is warm and fuzzy, cross-examination is often hostile. In financial litigation, expert witnesses are often certified forensic accountants. If the opposing side is using a forensic accounting expert as a witness, it is important to retain one as well. In their role as a litigation support analyst, the forensic accountant should be given all of the opposing side’s reports. Comparing these reports with their own, they can find any discrepancies and differences and then use these to begin building a cross-examination strategy. There are three steps to follow for a sound strategy. Reject or question expert’s opinion. Ultimately, the goal of a cross-examination is to call into question the credibility of the expert’s opinion or findings. This is where one’s own forensic accounting expert will use their knowledge of the complex terminology and methods to point out weaknesses in the opposing expert’s work and conclusions. One method of discrediting an opinion is with a Daubert Challenge. This is a challenge which examines five different aspects of an expert’s methods to verify their authority. They are: Whether the theory or technique used can be and has been tested; Whether the method has been subject to peer review and publication; Its potential or known error rate; The existence […]