Eyewitness testimony in a court of law is among the most compelling of all testimonials to a jury. However, this faith in eyewitnesses may be misplaced as many studies have uncovered faulty eyewitness testimony. As such, it is important to elicit accurate eyewitness evidence in court. First, the Anglo-Saxon system of adversarial justice is reviewed and the importance of verbal witness evidence is established. The process of evidence-in-chief and cross-examination are explained before the authors move on to an examination of factors that impact the accuracy of witness testimony. Types of witness responses elicited by open versus closed questions are considered as the argument is made that a closed questioning strategy may reduce the accuracy of testimony. Witness questioning strategies employed by attorneys are reviewed, including leading questions, questions using complex syntax, “pining out,” and multiple questions. More direct approaches used to cloud witness testimony involve attacking the witness’s integrity or innocence. The issue of establishing witness credibility is discussed; jurors have been found to rely on witness confidence as an assessment of the accuracy of their testimony. In the end, the type of strategy employed by attorneys for questioning witnesses hinges on the goal of the questioning and whether the defendant is actually guilty or innocent. Justice is not served by denying witnesses the opportunity to provide detailed accounts of what they witnessed. References