Instruct: Given a premise, retrieve hypotheses that are entailed by the premise.
Query: When your counsel asks you the question, you may review the article, take a look at it, see if it refreshes your recollection. It's important that having refreshed your recollection, if it jogs something or re-creates a memory, that you testify in answer to Mr. Harvey's question. Do not look back and read from the article as you're testifying, please. All right?
answering to Mr. Harvey's question do not need to read from the article as you're testifying.
They have the option to testify.
The reporters were subpoenaed to testify yesterday, according to this person's memory.
They will testify whatever is written in the articles
They have the chance to testify.
They have the choice to testify.
The other side objected on hearsay. 
Witnesses should never answer when the Court should rule on it.
The Court will ask the reporters to testify.
They have the ability to testify.
You wonder if there may not be a chance to accept the (statement sworn in court to be true) instead of the statements (in court).

They will maybe testify as to everything in the articles.
Was means this is a past recollection
The reconsideration, in some way, caused the reporters to have to testify at certain depositions.
The speaker refers to reporters being called upon to give testimony in some type of court proceeding. 
The narrator will appear at a deposition before the trial starts
They are going to testify about the images in those articles.
They can decide to testify.
Testifying is a choice.
It may seem like overkill, but you never know when something in your careful records can serve to prove the allegations.
The reporters are will testify on behalf of the defendant
The person is not 100% sure that certain topics will come up in the deposition.
Mr. Harvey is the prosecuting attorney.
Mr. Harvey is the defense counsel.
The person on the stand is Mr. Harvey's client.