What is the primary goal of cross-examination in a court proceeding?

The primary goal of cross-examination in a court proceeding is to discredit or clarify previous testimony. During cross-examination, the attorney questions a witness who has already provided testimony, typically with the intention of highlighting inconsistencies, probing for weaknesses in the testimony, or clarifying ambiguous statements. This process is crucial for ensuring that the jury or judge can assess the credibility of the witness and the reliability of the evidence being presented.

Cross-examination serves as a tool for the opposing party to challenge the testimony that could potentially support the other side's case. By effectively questioning a witness, the attorney can expose any inaccuracies or biases, thereby contributing to a more thorough examination of the facts.

The other options do not accurately reflect the primary objective of cross-examination. Providing additional evidence is typically done during direct examination rather than during cross-examination. Introducing new witnesses is not a function of cross-examination, as it focuses on witnesses already presented. Summarizing the case is usually reserved for closing arguments and not part of the cross-examination process.