History Main / ThatWasObjectionable

-->'''Shawn Spencer:'''Well, we're citing...unfair surprisery.

** In the episode "[[Recap/StarTrekTheNextGenerationS2E9TheMeasureOfAMan The Measure of a Man]]" Picard defends Data in a courtroom process, objecting to a plan that would see him labelled as Starfleet "property" and dismantled. The prosecution, for their case against Data, requests to [[ArtificialLimbs remove the defendant's hand]]. Picard is immediately on his feet with his objections before realizing that he can't actually object in a legal manner-in [[AFatherToHisMen typical Picard style]], he just doesn't like the idea of them removing his second officer's body parts-and withdraws his objection.

** Temporary honorary colonel.

* In the ''Series/StarTrekVoyager''/''Series/DoctorWho'' crossover "[[http://scarfman.iglouhost.com/image01.htm In Thy Image]]" by Paul Gadizowski (later adapted as [[http://www.arthurkingoftimeandspace.com/iti/index.html a comic]] in the style of Paul's ''Webcomic/HeroOfThreeFaces'', the Doctor is representing the Emergency Medical Hologram in a hearing to prove the EMH's personhood. When the Starfleet JAG attorney suggests that the EMH's failure to take a name indicates a recognition that he's ''not'' a person, content to be known only by his function -- a doctor -- his counsel naturally objects.

* In ''[[Literature/RatsBatsAndVats The Rats, The Bats, and the Ugly]]'', there is an oddly phrased but technically valid objection during Chip's [[spoiler:second]] court martial

'''Norden''': On the grounds that the counsel is ''[[IncrediblyLamePun leading]]'' the witness.

* Athena Cykes during the first case raises two valid objections. Firstly that to Prosecutor Payne's insinuation that anyone who had false charges brought against them would try to bomb a court, and another to Prosecutor Payne's misconduct towards the defendant.

* An accidental one in ''Series/LawAndOrderSpecialVictimsUnit'', Novak objects that the lawyer is leading the witness on cross-examination. This is allowable and expected. Parties aren't allowed to lead on ''direct'' examination (unless they specifically get permission to do so), but it is permissible during ''cross''-examination specifically because the assumption is that the relationship is adversarial and therefore the cross-examining attorney might need to ask more specific questions in order to impeach the witness' testimony.

** One early incident had Detective Munch testifying against a doctor who sexually assaulted a patient under the guise of treating her for hysteria. The defenses objections resulted in Munch, unprompted by the prosecutor, giving a history of hysteria and its treatments, culminating in explaining why the vibrator was invented; that got a simultaneous objection from the prosecution and the defense.[[note]]Presumably the objection is that it's beyond the scope of the questioning and/or that Munch's expertise hasn't been established to the standard required for court testimony -- both of which would in fact be legally valid objections -- but the judge sustains it without even requiring either party to state specific grounds.[[//note]]

* An accidental one in ''Series/LawAndOrderSpecialVictimsUnit'', Novak objects that the lawyer is leading the witness on cross-examination. This is allowable and expected. The witness already told their story on direct, the opposing counsel is now giving their side. In some cross-examinations the only word the lawyer wants to hear from their witness is "Yes" as they confirm what's being said.

** One early incident had Detective Munch testifying against a doctor who sexually assaulted a patient under the guise of treating her for hysteria. The defenses objections resulted in Munch, unprompted by the prosecutor, giving a history of hysteria and its treatments, culminating in explaining why the vibrator was invented; that got a simultaneous objection from the prosecution and the defense.