During courtroom testimony, opposing counsel may use rapid-firing questions to achieve what?

In courtroom testimony, when opposing counsel uses rapid-firing questions, the primary goal is often to confuse or lead the witness. This technique can create a sense of urgency or pressure, which may result in the witness providing inconsistent or unclear answers. Such a tactic can undermine the credibility of the testimony, as it may force the witness to respond without fully understanding the context or nuances of the questions being asked. This strategy can be particularly effective in cross-examination, where the attorney is trying to highlight weaknesses in the witness's statements or to provoke a response that contradicts prior testimony or evidence.

Other options do not accurately capture the intent behind this questioning style. For instance, trying to simulate agreement or encouraging relaxation would typically be counterproductive in a high-pressure courtroom environment. Likewise, while gathering information might be a secondary goal, the primary focus of using rapid-fire questions is often to create confusion and challenge the witness's reliability.