Shambles

You may have a point, "If the defence wish only to discredit any and all prosecution under cross-examination - perhaps the defendent should then also have to be subject to cross-examination?"

Is there a reason why the defendent was not subject to cross-examination? Or was it that the prosecutor chose not to cross-examine?

There must be a procedural rule regarding this obvious advantage to the defendent.

Maybe heric can answer this question.