Can a prosecutor cross-examine the evidence of a defendant's false or misleading prior statements about the charged crime?

Accordingly, the trial court instructed the jury on a defendant's false or misleading prior statements about the charged crime as conduct which may show consciousness of guilt (CALCRIM No. 362), as well as fabrication of evidence or testimony as evidence of consciousness of guilt (CALCRIM No. 371). The prosecutor could properly explore these issues in his cross-examination of defendant, amplifying defendant's direct testimony - that he lied to the detectives in his police interview and offered them a categorically different defense than that presented at trial - in order to impeach his credibility as a witness and show recent fabrication. (See People v. Letner & Tobin, supra, 50 Cal.4th at p. 199.) There was no trial court error or prosecutorial misconduct.