I completely agree with those who support what Lin did here. He insisted that they not even begin to go down the road of asking questions that have already been answered.

Now some may wonder what difference it makes.

Practical: Generally speaking, the answer given in 1997 or 1998 should be more accurate. If Patsy already answered it, then it should be a better answer --- unless she lied because she's a murderer. Lin is taking the position that earlier answers are better; Kane is taking the position that maybe she won't remember her earlier lie.

Legal: Did anyone notice that Kane challenged Lin as to whether or not he (Lin) was directing his client not to answer the question? The legal issue may have been: Lin is arguing "asked and answered," therefore this question is harassment; Kane was arguing that this is not "asked and answered" therefore not harassment --- instead it was "not answered upon advice of counsel." The latter is incriminating.

This is not mere bickering.