00:00 / 04:28
00:00 / 04:28

Myers Cross-Examines Leonard Vole, Explained

Myers has a simple weapon: the calendar. On the very day Mrs French changed her will in Leonard's favour, he was asking about luxury cruises with another woman. "Supposing I did? It's not a crime, is it?" Leonard snaps—and the jury is left weighing his word against the timing.

CourtroomInterrogationsConfrontingExplainingRivalsB2fastbritishClean

Key moments

Start here, then watch the full scene
  1. Myers Presses Leonard on the Cruise

    1:29–2:25
    56s
  2. ❝ Monologue · 9 lines Vole explains the travel agency

    He turns a shabby impulse into a vivid story, sounding foolish rather than guilty.

    3:06–3:48
    42s
  1. ❝ MonologueVole explains the travel agency9 linesPractice page ↗

Myers Cross-Examines Leonard Vole, explained

What happens

Leonard Vole takes the witness stand. Sir Wilfrid finishes his brief questioning and leaves him to the prosecution. Myers walks him through the trench coat, the will, and a visit to a travel agency on the same afternoon, then presses on a detail Leonard cannot explain: why plan an expensive cruise just as he inherits.

What's really going on

Myers is not chasing a confession; he is stacking coincidence. Each fact alone is harmless—a coat, a will, a travel agency—but together they sketch a man spending money he did not yet have. Leonard feels the trap and turns sharp: "Supposing I did? It's not a crime, is it?" That flash of temper is exactly what Myers wants the jury to see, because a composed innocent man would not defend himself so fast. Leonard then supplies his own damage: he admits he was "hard up," that the cruise talk was "just an act," and that he cannot explain Christine. Myers closes the net with "we've only your word for it." The scene is less about the murder than about how easily honest details can be arranged into guilt.

Key lines & what they mean

“I am confident that no matter how searching this may be, the prisoner will withstand it.”
Sir Wilfrid says the defence is not begging for mercy; he trusts Leonard can handle the prosecution's cross-examination.
“Supposing I did? It's not a crime, is it?”
Leonard turns defensive when asked about the cruise inquiries, insisting that asking is not itself illegal.
“Very effective, I'm sure. But in this court we deal with fact.”
Myers dismisses Leonard's emotional denials as performance and reminds him the court wants evidence.
“And the fact, Mr Vole, is that we've only your word for it.”
Myers closes by pointing out the defence rests entirely on Leonard's own unproven testimony.

Theme

  • Justice — The cross-examination tests whether Leonard's account can survive the case built against him.
  • Lies — Myers turns Leonard's own words—"just an act"—into proof he cannot explain the timing.

What this chapter teaches

Teaching points

Review right after watching
My level2/7

A1–C2 is the CEFR scale. Cards above the level you pick fade, and playback will not auto-pause on them.

Witness for the Prosecution: your progress

Chapter 22 of 27 · about 18 min to go

← Previous
Up next · 23wild-goose chaseThe scene: The Call About the German Wife

Takeaways

What you walk away with
  1. Myers tightens the net with one fact at a time.
  2. A shabby man in a luxury agency looks guilty.
  3. Vole's story is vivid, foolish and hard to check.
  4. The closing line reduces everything to his word.

People also search

Questions, then the lines
Why does Myers bring up the travel agency?

It undercuts Leonard's story that he was just killing time with a strange girl. Asking about deluxe cruises the same day Mrs French changed her will makes him look like a man planning how to spend the inheritance.

Why does Leonard say he was 'hard up'?

Myers presses him on how he could afford a luxury cruise while unemployed. Leonard admits he had almost no money, which is exactly why the inquiries look suspicious to the jury.

Why won't Leonard admit Christine might be telling the truth?

He insists she must be lying or out of her mind, but cannot explain why she would testify against him. Myers treats this as the weakness in his defence.

Is Leonard's alibi actually proven?

No. No witness came forward to confirm he left Mrs French's house or entered his own at the times he claimed, so the defence rests on Leonard's word alone.