Ha! That would be awesome if that were a proper legal objection.
"Judge, the defense attorney is a whining little b*&ch and everyone in the courtroom knows it," your lawyer screams out. Well, if EVERYONE in the courtroom already knows it, what benefit can come from the lawyer jumping up out of his seat and now yelling it out loud to everyone in the courtroom? What's the judge going to do? Tell you yes, even I realize that this lawyer is a whiner and complainer?
Ah, no. That would be a big no.
First, an attorney making this motion is likely frustrated. He's frustrated that the opposing lawyer is whining. He's annoyed and has clearly reached his breaking point. But here he makes a tactical mistake. If he knows the defense attorney is whining and he sees that the jury knows he's whining and even the judge knows it, why divert everyone's attention from it just to interrupt it?
What will he accomplish by yelling out "OBJECTION JUDGE! HE'S WHINING!"
The answer is very little if anything.
Believe me, there are plenty of lawyers who fit in this category. There are plenty of attorneys who are annoying during trial. Whether it's intentional or not is another story. The point is that when you stand up and make an objection, it's supposed to be because the lawyer is doing something that's causing you concern.
"Judge, that's an improperly worded question."
"Judge, that's irrelevant."
"Judge, he's badgering the witness."
"Judge, he's asking leading questions."
Those are proper legal objections. Not "Judge he's being a whiny little baby."
By the way, what's the purpose of an objection during trial?
It's really to let the judge know that something's wrong. It's to alert the judge that there's a problem and he needs to decide whether to allow the question or evidence in. It preserves an attorneys' right to appeal if he makes the objection at the time its' happening. Otherwise, if he loses the case and appeals, claiming that the judge shouldn't have allowed certain testimony, the higher court will look to see if he objected during trial. If he didn't they'll say he waived his right to appeal that issue and can't do it now.
"Judge, we were never notified that they were bringing in this medical expert!"
"Judge, I move to preclude this witness since they never exchanged his medical report as they're required to do."
"Judge, I ask you to strike this witness' testimony as he's not qualified to testify on this subject."
Now the judge has to rule on each objection.
If the judge agrees with the attorney making the objection, he'll say "Objection sustained." That means that the question cannot be asked or the evidence will not be allowed in. It means he agrees with the attorney who raised the objection.
If the judge does not agree with the lawyer making the objection, he'll say "Objection overruled." That basically means that he knows the attorney has a problem with a question or a witness or evidence and he doesn't agree that it's a problem. He's overruling him. The judge can do that. That's one of his main functions during trial.
To learn more about trial objections, I invite you to watch the video series below...
