Several fundamental techniques are often used to cross-examine an expert witness. The examiner may:

• Attempt to make the expert a witness for the opposition by trying to turn the testimony to support the opposite position.
• Attack the field of expertise, or show lack of recognition of the professional field.
• Attack the witness's qualifications, or establish gaps in the professional résumé.
• Expose the witness's bias, or give reasons why the testimony is slanted.
• Attack the witness's fact basis by trying to show that:
  • The investigation was inadequate.
  • Preparation was not accurately accomplished.
  • The expert is unfamiliar with the scene of the event.
  • Accurate measurements were absent.
  • Personal verification or testing was absent.
  • Inappropriate second-hand information was relied upon.
• Change the hypothetical question(s) used on direct examination, and vary the facts to support the opposition, if use of hypothetical question(s) is the basis for expert opinion.
• Impeach the witness with learned treatises and journals. Any recognized text that is authoritative in nature can be used to cross-examine the testifying expert.
• Attack the witness head-on, and find prior contrary writings by the witness.

Of highest value to the cross-examining attorney are writings and prior testimonies of the testifying witness that might contain recitations, statements or affirmations of fact, or scientific, technical or professional conclusions that are directly contrary to the witness's stated testimony in the instant case.

Back Forward