Jacob Dean wrote:
As a judge, I really just want to hear you respond to this situation with a simple "I'll be happy to read that evidence," as long as you follow through and either you or your partner read that evidence in the next speech. Even if the crosser is being silly, all you have to do is remain calm. You should be able to get that response out before being cut off.
I agree that's how you the asked should respond, but I am more frustrated that people are asking in the first place. After all, the words "I'll be happy to read it" might sound awesome, but you know while you're uttering them that your opp has no interest in you reading it - if he's wise he would much rather you didn't, which is why asking about it's existence makes absolutely no sense in my mind.
Well, what opp may be doing (and I've done this before) is trying to suck up your time while undermining your credibility. Basically, it goes like this (when C-Xing an underexperienced team):
CXer: Did you read evidence on XYZ?
CXee: No, but we have it.
CXer: Coolio -- could you read that in your next speech?
They either waste time addressing an uncontested point, or they never get to it -- in which case even if you don't point that out to the judge, their credibility is undermined.
I'll admit right now that this is a completely unreasonable tactic. Which is why if opp asked me that question I would say: "If you contest that point, we'll address it."
So, the best way to make this backfire on opp and prevent them from doing it again is to call them out on it in CX.
@Vance: Good tactic, there. I'd prolly say that as well.
Just realized I double-posted...