evidence Flashcards
when are prior inconsistent statements admissible and for what reasons?
Prior inconsistent statements are admissible as substantive evidence (and not excluded as hearsay) under the Federal Rules of Evidence [Fed. R. Evid. 801] if the declarant testifies at the trial and is subject to cross-examination, and the prior statement was given under oath at a prior proceeding.
If they do not meet these standards, prior inconsistent statements are hearsay that is admissible for the limited purpose of impeachment.
should an expert’s opinion be excluded simply because it comes to a conclusion that may differ from another expert?
no!! it is the job of the trier of fact to weight the credibility and reliability of the evidence - including the expert’s testimony - and decide how much credence it should have.
what types of evidence are allowed in a CIVIL case where character is at issue?
Here, character is in issue, because this case involves defamation. When character is in issue in a civil case, all three forms of evidence are admissible: reputation, opinion, and specific acts. In these facts, we are using prior specific acts substantively for their truth, rather than the limited use.
