Does the prosecutor have the authority to impeach a defendant's credibility as to his self-defense claim at trial?

The prosecutor was entitled to and did use defendant's prior inconsistent statement, including his failure to mention any need for self-defense to detectives, to impeach his credibility as to his self-defense claim at trial. Therefore, to the extent the prosecutor arguably also drew the jury's attention, impermissibly, to defendant's failure to claim self-defense during the period of post-invocation silence, such evidence was cumulative in nature. Put simply, the damage to defendant's credibility was inflicted not by any reference to his post-invocation silence, but by the starkly contrasting versions of events and his failure to tell detectives he had been attacked and feared further attack. (People v. Collins, supra, 49 Cal.4th at p. 204.)