No one correct technique

[6000] There is no one correct method of cross-examination. One advocate may be comfortable with a style that will be hard won by another advocate. But whatever your style, you will use different techniques with different witnesses. You will also use different techniques with the one witness. The nature of the witness and the content of the evidence will give you the clues. Choose the techniques that suit your style and the witness you are cross-examining.

[6005] The only method of cross-examination that can clearly be identified is confrontation. Confrontation means challenging a witness with damaging facts to break down the witness's story. Other methods of cross-examination involve undermining a witness in various ways. Often you will use the evidence of one witness to undermine the evidence of a central witness for the other side who has not yet given evidence. If you have material that contradicts the evidence-in-chief you may prefer to persuade the witness to agree with the contradictory evidence. Advocacy as the art of persuasion often includes persuading a witness.

[6010] Trying to characterise the different techniques is not easy. What may be more valuable is to examine examples from actual cases.

Confrontation

[6015] You can only confront a witness when you have real material to work with. This is armed combat. The material might comprise the statements or evidence of the witness or of other people. That material will be at odds with the evidence-in-chief of the witness.