What is customary when reading back to a jury?

Prepare for the Certified Shorthand Reporter (CSR) Test with engaging questions, detailed explanations, and helpful tips. Master the skills needed to excel as a shorthand reporter!

When reading back to a jury during a trial, it is customary to delete questions to which an objection has been sustained. This practice ensures that the jury hears only the relevant information that is legally permitted and avoids confusion or bias that might arise from material that has been ruled inadmissible.

The primary goal in a courtroom setting, especially when addressing a jury, is to present information that is clear, straightforward, and compliant with the rules of evidence. Sustained objections typically indicate that the question posed is objectionable for some reason, whether it's leading, speculative, or irrelevant. Therefore, omitting these questions helps maintain the integrity of the trial process and ensures that the jury receives only credible testimony.

In contrast, summarizing the entire case can lead to subjective interpretations and potentially misrepresent the evidence. Reading all evidence verbatim might overwhelm the jury with unnecessary details that could detract from the key points of the case. Providing personal interpretations of testimony is also inappropriate, as it can skew the jury's understanding and decision-making by inserting personal bias rather than sticking to what the witness actually said. Thus, the practice of removing sustained objections is critical for a fair and objective reading of the case to the jury.