_Damian Ruhele v. Republic, Criminal Appeal No. 501 of 2007 (unreported). _ When you fail to cross-examine a witness on asserted facts, the trier of fact (judge or jury) may assume those facts to be accurate, as they haven't been challenged. This is because cross-examination allows for the questioning of witness credibility and the potential exposure of weaknesses in their testimony, which helps the trier of fact assess the truthfulness of the evidence. Without cross-examination, the evidence is presented without a proper challenge, potentially leading to an inaccurate conclusion.