Ma. Alejandra Padilla-LaCour Apr 21:

Jennifer, as you well describe, the way it is written seems not to make sense to me, as a lawyer would not ask the judge to" push the witness to the cross". highly unethical/illegal.

I really do like your interpretation re. the judge giving more leeway to the lawyer doing the cross-examination.

Andrew Bramhall Apr 20:

@JL That was also my initial supposition,that this relates to a (US?) film script . The asker,Beatriz, seemed to inadvertently confirm this by suggesting a non-juridic idiom like 'poner contra las cuerdas' i.e the boxing analogy of getting them" on the ropes".

Jennifer Levey Apr 19:

@AB I'm just reading the entire question as posted by Beatriz - including her explanation about who is hablando con who, and drawing what seems to me to be a logical conclusion.

And when you, AB, write "surely the judge would be guilty of bias?", you'll understand why I asked Beatriz if she is translating a movie script.

That said, I'm all too well aware that there are corrupt judges in the 'real world' too :(

Andrew Bramhall Apr 19:

@JL If what you state is true, then surely the judge would be guilty of bias?

Jennifer Levey Apr 19:

@All No-one has (yet) explained, here in the discussion box or in the various answers, how it is that (according to the limited context given by Beatriz), the quoted text is uttered by un abogado who is hablando con el juez.
We don't know what formal role this abogado plays in this scenario, but he appears to be trying to persuade the (supposedly unbiased, impartial, ... ?!) judge to direct the cross-examination of the Crown's witnesses in a manner that will be favourable to the defendant's lawyer.

As noted in Ma. Alejandra´s excellent contribution, "cross-examination is the process where the opposing attorney questions a witness who has already testified on direct examination"; but there are rules to be followed and objections may be raised by the other lawyer with a view to having certain questions or interrogation tactics disallowed - and perhaps the ST is suggesting that the judge should allow or overrule such objections in a way that's favourable to the defense.

@Beatriz: Is this a movie script you're translating?

Ma. Alejandra Padilla-LaCour Apr 19:

Sorry aqui la continuación Leading questions:
Asking questions that suggest the desired answer, rather than allowing the witness to answer freely.
Intense questioning:
Using aggressive or confrontational questioning to pressure the witness to provide certain information.
Interrupting and controlling the witness:
Taking control of the conversation and not allowing the witness to speak freely or offer alternative explanations.
Why is this controversial? While some lawyers find these tactics necessary to expose the truth, others consider them unethical or potentially coercive. The goal of cross-examination is to get at the facts, but it is also important to ensure that the process is fair and that the witness is not pressured into giving false testimony.
In summary, "pushing" a witness in the cross refers to using aggressive or leading questioning techniques during cross-examination to force the witness to reveal facts that support the lawyer's case, which can be a controversial and potentially problematic approach.

Ma. Alejandra Padilla-LaCour Apr 19:

Beatriz, podria ser " tiene que "apretarlo" (slang rioplatense) con preguntas ..... durante el contrainterrogatorio."

La frase "you have to push him in the cross" es un termino legal refers to a lawyer using aggressive or leading questioning techniques during cross-examination to force a witness to reveal facts that support the lawyer's client's case.
Here's a more detailed explanation:
Cross-examination is the process where the opposing attorney questions a witness who has already testified on direct examination. The primary goal of cross-examination is to:
Test the witness's credibility: This involves questioning the witness's memory, biases, and motivations.
Challenge the witness's testimony: This can involve pointing out inconsistencies, contradictions, or weaknesses in the witness's story.
Reveal new facts: Cross-examination can also be used to bring out additional information that was not revealed during direct examination.
"Pushing" in the cross refers to the lawyer's tactics during cross-examination that are designed to control the witness and elicit specific answers. This can involve:
Leading questions:
Asking