Quote:
Originally Posted by taxbuster
The Defence absolutely barraged EM over inconsistencies…and it seems odd that the Crown has to make application to cross their own (apparently reluctant) witness.
|
I think it just has to do with how trials are organized. We are still in the Crown's case phase of the trial. The Crown presents witnesses, then the defense cross-examines, and the Crown can then re-examine. When it is the defense's turn, they present witnesses and the Crown crosses. So it isn't like the accused was being unfairly cross-examined on her inconsistencies, it was just their turn.
If the Crown wants to cross-examine a witness at this phase because the witness seems to be testifying for the defense, it's outside of the normal procedure. If the defense doesn't call him, the Crown wouldn't get an opportunity to cross examine. I don't see an issue if the judge allows it, but for the sake of having a clean trial, I can see why it needs to be debated and subject to a judge's discretion. There could be valid reasons to not allow it I assume as well.