Exactly. That is part of the approach.
Given the circumstances, these are investigations for the purposes of corroboration. We never just simply compare the victim's word to theirs. It's never their word against ours. Our work consists in supporting that testimony by going into the field to meticulously corroborate everything in their statement. That way, if the victim goes back on their testimony, the judge will be in a position to appreciate all the evidence accumulated during the first testimony, which might have been changed later in the court, and then come to a decision based on those facts.