This contribution studies judges’ interventions (spontaneity, type, modality, duration, outcome) during the examinations led by prosecutor, defence and civil party in three criminal trials. Through a combined qualitative and quantitative approach, the relevant categories concerning the characteristics of the interventions were identified and applied to videorecorded materials. Overall, the identified judges’ interventions are N = 443. Our results show that most of the interventions were not requested by the parties, aimed to ask/provide information rather than recall to duties or reformulation, were executed in a paternalistic way or in a neutral/logic manner rather than in a helping/supporting or reprimanding one, and finished in agreement rather than compromise, disagreement or negative outcome.