Is a finder of fact not compelled to discount the evidence of a witness on a point when an opposing witness has not been confronted and challenged with the contrary version of the evidence?

It is plain, then, that the finder of fact is not compelled to discount the evidence of a witness on a point when an opposing witness has not been explicitly confronted and challenged with the contrary version. The fact finder instead is entitled to consider the entire context of the case – including whether fairness to witnesses and parties is achieved in some way other than the precise questions put to a witness in cross-examination – to decide whether to grant a remedy, what remedy is appropriate, and whether and by how much a witness’s credibility is impacted by a failure to follow the Rule in Browne v. Dunn.