Gonzalez & Waddington, Attorneys at Law defend service members worldwide in Article 120 sexual assault and Article 120c indecent conduct court-martials. In close-call consent cases, cross-examination wins or loses the trial. This guide gives you a battle-tested framework to plan, script, and execute surgical crosses of the accuser, SANE nurses, law-enforcement agents, and government experts—while staying within MRE limits and preserving credibility with the panel.

First Principles: How Winning Cross Actually Works

• One fact per question. Short, declarative, leading. The jurors should nod along.
• Control, don’t debate. Cross is not closing. Force yes/no; save argument for summation.
• Primacy/recency. Start and end with your strongest, provable points.
• Commit, credit, confront. Lock the witness, show the contradiction, then confront with the prior statement (MRE 613).
• Tell your story with their witnesses. Every module advances your theory of the case.

MRE Guardrails You Must Respect

• MRE 412 (sexual behavior). File a detailed motion if evidence is constitutionally required (motive to fabricate, identity, alternative source of injury). Expect an in-camera hearing.
• MRE 404(b). Push back on “other acts” propensity; demand notice; argue unfair prejudice vs. probative value (MRE 403).
• MRE 608/613. Use opinion/reputation for truthfulness with care; anchor impeachment in specific contradictions and bias.
• MRE 513/514. Psychotherapist and victim-advocate privileges are narrow; tailor requests to material facts and show necessity.
• MRE 701/702. Keep SANE nurses and agents inside their expertise; object to speculation or “ultimate issue” gloss.

Cross of the Accuser: Modules That Move the Needle

1) Timeline & Opportunity (Anchor the Case)

• Exact times, locations, who was present; phone usage; door swipes; rideshare; CCTV; metadata.
• Goal: a clean, visualizable sequence you can later juxtapose with digital records.

2) Post-Event Behavior (Conduct Inconsistent with Assault)

• Friendly texts, selfies, social plans, continued contact, silence where reporting was easy.
• Goal: reasonable doubt on state of mind and narrative plausibility—not victim-blaming.

3) Prior Inconsistent Statements (MRE 613)

• Lock the current version ➜ credit the prior statement (agent notes, 911, SANE history) ➜ confront.
• Goal: reliability, not humiliation. Three crisp contradictions beat thirty quibbles.

4) Bias, Motive, Secondary Gain

• Breakup/jealousy; discipline avoidance; transfers; privileges; command leverage; civil claims.
• Goal: a reason to exaggerate or reinterpret.

5) Alcohol & Memory Science (Carefully)

• What was consumed, when, by whom; BAC estimates are for experts—your questions are about certainty, not chemistry.
• Goal: honest limits of perception and recall, not shaming.

Cross of SANE/Forensic Nurse: No Injury ≠ No Consent; Injury ≠ Assault

• Scope & limits. Training hours, certifications, protocols, checklists; who taught them what “findings mean.”
• Methodology. Lighting, speculum type, inter-rater reliability, timing since encounter, patient sexual history intake as data gathering, not 412 content.
• Statistics & literature. Many assaults show no injury; consensual acts may show injury—get the concession.
• Documentation gaps. Photos taken/not taken; missing swabs; chain of custody for kits.
• Ultimate issue. Push back on “trauma-consistent” opinions cloaked as science.

Cross of CID/NCIS/OSI/CGIS: Confirmation Bias & Tunnel Vision

• Leads not run. Devices never imaged; alibi witnesses not called; cameras not pulled in time.
• Selective note-taking. What important exculpatory points never made it into the report.
• Interview science. Non-recorded interviews; contamination; suggestive questioning; first-complaint timing lost.
• Data integrity. Hash values for extractions, preservation letters, versioning of exports.

Government Experts: Keep Them In Their Lane

• Toxicology. Titrate the confidence intervals; assumptions stacked on assumptions; retrograde extrapolation caveats.
• DNA/Touch DNA. Transfer vs. activity level; mixed profiles; stochastic effects; absence ≠ exculpatory; presence ≠ assault.
• Digital forensics. Completeness of threads; native files vs. screenshots; time-zone offsets; device ownership/use.

Scripted Cross Lines You Can Adapt

ACCUSER – POST-EVENT CONTACT
Q. After that night, you texted him "Are you coming by tomorrow?"        Yes/No.
Q. And later that week, you sent a selfie to him from your barracks.     Yes/No.
Q. You did not block his number that week.                               Yes/No.

SANE – INJURY/NO INJURY
Q. Many sexual assaults present with no visible injury, correct?         Yes.
Q. And consensual intercourse can produce redness or microtears?         Yes.
Q. So injury alone cannot tell the panel whether sex was consensual.     Yes.

AGENT – MISSED LEADS
Q. You never subpoenaed the Uber logs for that time window, correct?     Correct.
Q. You did not download her phone until two weeks later?                 Correct.
Q. You did not interview the two soldiers she named as being nearby?     Correct.
    

Credibility Without Cruelty: Ethical & Effective Cross

• Avoid cheap shots; jurors punish bullying. Precision wins.
• Use neutral, respectful phrasing; let the fact pattern do the work.
• Preclear sensitive areas with the judge (412/513) to avoid backlash.

Prep Checklist (Before You Stand)

• Outline modules (timeline, post-event, bias, science) with 5–7 locked facts each.
• Mark every impeachment page/line; prepare exhibit stickers and quick-flip tabs.
• Coordinate with your experts for two or three must-get concessions.
• Write your first three and last three questions—then memorize them.

Common Cross Mistakes to Avoid

• Arguing with the witness; asking “Why?” questions you can’t control.
• Piling on minor inconsistencies; losing the panel in trivia.
• Asking one question too many; stop after the concession.
• Crossing where you didn’t win the motion first (412/404(b)/702).
• Skipping a clean close that re-highlights your three strongest admissions.

Video: Cross-Examination in Military Sexual Assault Trials

Bring Trial-Grade Cross to Your Article 120 Case

We script crosses that lock timelines, expose bias, and police the science. If you’re facing an Article 120 or 120c court-martial, get a team that tries cases—and wins with cross.

Gonzalez & Waddington — ucmjdefense.com — 1-800-921-8607

FAQs: Cross in Article 120/120c Trials