What aspect of officer testimony involves questioning a witness on their previous statements?

The aspect of officer testimony that involves questioning a witness on their previous statements is known as cross-examination. During this stage of a trial, an attorney seeks to challenge the credibility and reliability of a witness's testimony, often by highlighting any inconsistencies between the witness's current statements and previous statements or evidence. This serves to test the truthfulness and accuracy of the witness's recollection by bringing to light any contradictions or omissions, thereby allowing the attorney to argue that the witness's current testimony may not be credible or fully trustworthy.

In contrast, direct examination is when a witness is first questioned by the party that called them to testify, focusing primarily on the narrative of their account without leading questions. Rebuttal is the stage where a party introduces evidence to counter or refute the evidence presented by the opposing party, while a preliminary statement typically involves an introduction to the case or a summary of the evidence expected to be presented. Each of these serves a different purpose, which is why cross-examination is specifically designed for scrutinizing and questioning the witness's earlier statements.