crossexamine

Cross-examination is a phase in adversarial legal proceedings in which a party questions a witness who testified on direct examination. Its purpose is to test the witness's memory, credibility, and the reliability or completeness of the testimony. By exposing inconsistencies, biases, or motives, cross-examination aims to narrow or reinterpret the evidence presented during direct examination and to advance the examining party's theory of the case.

In most jurisdictions, cross-examination is conducted after direct examination. Leading questions are commonly permitted on cross, and questions may reference documents or prior statements. The scope generally includes matters raised during the witness's direct testimony, as well as related facts the examiner wishes to illuminate. Certain topics, such as privileged communications or legally protected statements, are prohibited or restricted. The witness is under oath and must answer, subject to objections from counsel and rulings by the judge.

Common techniques include highlighting inconsistencies with prior testimony or other evidence, pointing out gaps in memory or perception, challenging credibility through bias or motive, and introducing impeachment by prior inconsistent statements or prior criminal convictions where permitted. Cross-examiners may use documents, exhibits, or hypotheticals to test the witness's conclusions.

Critics argue cross-examination can be aggressive or intimidating and may lead juries to rely on impression rather than fact. Proponents see it as essential for testing evidence and ensuring fairness. Cross-examination methods vary by jurisdiction, but the basic objective remains to scrutinize testimony and contribute to a just resolution based on the full set of facts.