Le ré-interrogatoire doit être lié au contre-interrogatoire et son but est de clarifier, nuancer ou expliquer sa réponse précédemment fournie

R. v. Candir, 2009 ONCA 915 

Lien vers la décision

[148]      It is fundamental that the permissible scope of re-examination is linked to its purpose and the subject-matter on which the witness has been cross-examined.  The purpose of re-examination is largely rehabilitative and explanatory. The witness is afforded the opportunity, under questioning by the examiner who called the witness in the first place, to explain, clarify or qualify answers given in cross-examination that are considered damaging to the examiner’s case.  The examiner has no right to introduce new subjects in re-examination, topics that should have been covered, if at all, in examination in-chief of the witness.  A trial judge has a discretion, however, to grant leave to the party calling a witness to introduce new subjects in re-examination, but must afford the opposing party the right of further cross-examination on the new facts: R. v. Moore (1984), 1984 CanLII 3542 (ON CA), 15 C.C.C. (3d) 541 (Ont. C.A.), at p. 568.