This HTML5 document contains 27 embedded RDF statements represented using HTML+Microdata notation.

The embedded RDF content will be recognized by any processor of HTML5 Microdata.

Namespace Prefixes

Prefix	IRI
dcterms	http://purl.org/dc/terms/
dbo	http://dbpedia.org/ontology/
foaf	http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/
n17	https://global.dbpedia.org/id/
dbt	http://dbpedia.org/resource/Template:
rdfs	http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#
n12	https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/
freebase	http://rdf.freebase.com/ns/
rdf	http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
owl	http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#
wikipedia-en	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
dbc	http://dbpedia.org/resource/Category:
prov	http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#
dbp	http://dbpedia.org/property/
xsdh	http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#
gold	http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/
wikidata	http://www.wikidata.org/entity/
dbr	http://dbpedia.org/resource/

Statements

Subject Item

dbr:Argumentative

rdfs:label

Argumentative

rdfs:comment

In the American legal system, argumentative is an evidentiary objection raised in response to a question which prompts a witness to draw inferences from facts of the case. One common misconception is that argumentative questions are meant only to cause a witness to argue with the examiner. This error rests on misunderstanding the word "argument". Argument can mean "a series of persuasive statements" (the legal sense discussed in this article) as well as "a verbal fight or disagreement". Thus, an argumentative objection may be raised only when the lawyer himself is making a legal argument under the guise of asking a question. "Badgering the witness" is the proper objection for a lawyer who is antagonizing or mocking a witness by asking insulting or derisive questions, perhaps in an attempt

dcterms:subject

dbc:Law_of_the_United_States dbc:Evidence_law

dbo:wikiPageID

2301750

dbo:wikiPageRevisionID

1112449584

dbo:wikiPageWikiLink

dbr:Witness dbr:Term_of_art dbr:Evidence_(law) dbr:Inference dbc:Law_of_the_United_States dbr:Negligence dbr:Argument dbc:Evidence_law dbr:Objection_(law)

dbo:wikiPageExternalLink

n12:rules.htm%23Rule611

owl:sameAs

freebase:m.0725t8 wikidata:Q4789761 n17:4SfYG

dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate

dbt:Law-term-stub dbt:Refimprove dbt:Redirect

dbo:abstract

In the American legal system, argumentative is an evidentiary objection raised in response to a question which prompts a witness to draw inferences from facts of the case. One common misconception is that argumentative questions are meant only to cause a witness to argue with the examiner. This error rests on misunderstanding the word "argument". Argument can mean "a series of persuasive statements" (the legal sense discussed in this article) as well as "a verbal fight or disagreement". Thus, an argumentative objection may be raised only when the lawyer himself is making a legal argument under the guise of asking a question. "Badgering the witness" is the proper objection for a lawyer who is antagonizing or mocking a witness by asking insulting or derisive questions, perhaps in an attempt to provoke an emotional response.

gold:hypernym

dbr:Objection

prov:wasDerivedFrom

wikipedia-en:Argumentative?oldid=1112449584&ns=0

dbo:wikiPageLength

3309

foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf

wikipedia-en:Argumentative