In People v. Spain (1984) 154 Cal.App.3d 845, the Court explained: "The danger in allowing 'a question that suggests to the witness the answer that the examining party desires' (Evid. Code, 764) is to the truth-seeking function of the trial. Allowing the examiner to put answers in the witness' mouth raises the possibility of collusion citation, as well as the possibility that the witness will acquiesce in a false suggestion. This danger is substantially reduced, however, when it is an adverse witness under cross-examination. 'The purpose of the cross-examination is to sift his or her testimony and weaken its force, in short, to discredit the direct testimony. Thus, not only the presumable bias of the witness for the opponent's cause, but also his or her sense of reluctance to become the instrument of his or her own discrediting, deprive him or her of any inclination to accept the cross-examiner's suggestions unless the truth forces him or her to.' ." (Id. at pp. 852-853.)