Hypothetical question: B was driving a car and hit C at traffic lights. A is the prosecutions witness.
In A's testimony: says that B went through a red light and hit C.
In cross-examination by defence: A's out of court statement says B went through a green light and hit C.
In re-examination: A's out of court statement says C went through a green light and hit B.
My question is:
1. If the prosecution adduces this statement in re-examination they would be discrediting their witness, so what reason would they be doing this for?
Thank you!
Kate
In A's testimony: says that B went through a red light and hit C.
In cross-examination by defence: A's out of court statement says B went through a green light and hit C.
In re-examination: A's out of court statement says C went through a green light and hit B.
My question is:
1. If the prosecution adduces this statement in re-examination they would be discrediting their witness, so what reason would they be doing this for?
Thank you!
Kate
