Factors determining extent of cross-examination

Factors determining extent of cross-examination

Devastating cross-examination of prosecution witnesses is best saved for trial, when the prosecution is less likely to be able to rehabilitate its witness. However, if the preliminary hearing evidence is a bargaining tool to prove to the prosecution that its case suffers from substantial weaknesses, counsel may want to take a more aggressive position.

It should be kept in mind that in many jurisdictions different prosecutors handle the preliminary hearing and the trial. Often the prosecutor handling the preliminary hearing does not have authority to enter into a plea bargain even if he or she is so inclined. In a computer crime case, it is more likely that the same prosecutor will follow the case from beginning to end because of its technical nature, and because of the likelihood that it is a case with a lot of publicity and high attention within the office and within the local community. In these cases, it is even more beneficial to attempt to educate the prosecution as to the weaknesses in its case.