How can the prosecution rebut the defendant's evidence of good character?

The prosecution can effectively rebut the defendant's evidence of good character by cross-examining the witness on specific acts relevant to the trait being presented. This method allows the prosecution to challenge the credibility of the character evidence by providing concrete examples that contradict the good character being claimed. By questioning the witness about specific conduct that reflects poorly on the defendant's character, the prosecution can show that the defendant's character traits do not support their claim for good character.

This approach is grounded in the legal principle that while a defendant may introduce evidence of good character, that evidence can be tested through relevant questioning about behavior that is pertinent to the traits being discussed. This process helps establish that the character evidence presented by the defendant may not reflect their true nature if there are discrepancies in the specific acts mentioned.