s 155 Exclusion of evidence to contradict answers to questions testing veracity
155. When a witness has been asked and has answered any question which is relevant to the inquiry only insofar as it tends to shake the witness’s credit by injuring his or her character, no evidence may be given to contradict him or her; but if the witness answers falsely he or she may afterwards be charged with giving false evidence. Exception 1.—If a witness is asked whether he or she has been previously convicted of any crime and denies it, evidence may be given of his or her previous conviction. Exception 2.—If a witness is asked any question tending to impeach his or her impartiality and answers it by denying the facts suggested, he or she may be contradicted. Illustrations (a) A claim against an underwriter is resisted on the ground of fraud. The claimant is asked whether in a former transaction he or she had not made a fraudulent claim. The claimant denies it. Evidence is offered to show that the claimant did make such a claim. The evidence is inadmissible. (b) A witness is asked whether he or she was not dismissed from a situation for dishonesty. The witness denies it. Evidence is offered to show that the witness was dismissed for dishonesty. The evidence is not admissible. (c) A affirms that on a certain day A saw B at Malacca. A is asked whether A was not on that day at Penang. A denies it. Evidence is offered to show that A was on that day at Penang. The evidence is admissible, not as contradicting A on a fact which affects A’s credit, but as contradicting the alleged fact that B was seen on the day in question in Malacca. (d) A is tried for a rape on B. B is asked in cross-examination whether she has not had illicit intercourse with C and D. She denies it. Evidence is offered to show that she has had such intercourse with C and D. The evidence is not admissible. In each of the cases in illustrations (c) and (d), the witness might, if the denial was false, be charged with giving false evidence. (e) A is asked whether A has not said that A would be revenged on B, against whom A gives evidence. A denies it. A may be contradicted on the ground that the question tends to impeach A’s impartiality.