With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". effect, particularly as similar evidence was admitted without objection or claim of error. Point two is denied. Conclusion The trial court’s judgment is affirmed. All concur. 1 . We view the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict. State v. Guinan, 665 S.W.2d 325, 327 (Mo. banc 1984). 2 . The testimony had been cleansed of any references that might suggest it had been taken from Williams during a prior trial. The testimony was referred to as having been taken in a "prior proceeding.” 3 . The ability to use a defendant's prior voluntary testimony in a subsequent proceeding as an admission must be distinguished, however, from the ability to compel a defendant to testify in a subsequent proceeding. State ex rel. Imboden v. Romines, 760 S.W.2d 130, 134 (Mo.App. E.D.1988) (<HOLDING>). " ‘It is settled by the overwhelming weight

A: holding that a workers compensation proceeding is a legal proceeding
B: holding that it is elementary that one may not be a witness and a judge in the same proceeding and remanding for a new hearing with a different judge punctuation omitted
C: holding that where a witness who testifies under oath and is subject to crossexamination in a prior state court proceeding explicitly refuses to answer the same questions at trial the refusal to answer is inconsistent with his prior testimony
D: holding that a witness who testifies in one proceeding may not be compelled to give further testimony in a different proceeding
D.