What is the purpose of cross-examination in a courtroom?

Cross-examination serves as a critical component of the courtroom procedure, primarily allowing the opposing party to question a witness who has already provided testimony during direct examination. This process enables the opposing counsel to challenge the credibility, reliability, and consistency of the witness's testimony, aiming to elicit information that may support their case or undermine the other party's arguments.

By engaging in cross-examination, attorneys can highlight potential biases, inconsistencies, or gaps in the witness's statements, thereby influencing the jury's perception of the evidence presented. This method is fundamental to ensuring that both sides have an opportunity to scrutinize the testimony, which helps maintain the integrity of the judicial process.

In contrast, summarizing evidence or validating a witness's responses does not capture the essence of cross-examination. The goal is not to restate or confirm what has already been said but to critically analyze and test the witness's statements. Additionally, presenting new evidence against the plaintiff typically occurs through other means, such as introducing new documents or witnesses, rather than through the process of cross-examination.