Short and Happy Guide Chapter 6: Hearsay

Question 1

________ refers to an out-of-court statement.

Answer 1

Hearsay

Question 2

The foundation of the _______ rule is that out-of-court statements generally should not be used, unless there is a likelihood that the statements are accurate.

Answer 2

hearsay

Question 3

The reliability of out-of-court statements has to do with the degree to which believing the evidence requires unsupported reliance upon the four things we call the __________ _______ of the person making the statement.

Answer 3

testimonial capacities

Question 4

Testimonial capacities are known as:
1.
2.
3.
4.

Answer 4

1. Sincerity
2. Perception
3. Narration
4. Memory

Question 5

By way of example, consider Tina’s statement about stealing cash from the cash register. Let’s examine the testimonial capacities in light of her hearsay statement:

Maybe she lied (she wanted you to get into trouble).

Answer 5

Sincerity

Question 6

By way of example, consider Tina’s statement about stealing cash from the cash register. Let’s examine the testimonial capacities in light of her hearsay statement:

Maybe her vision was bad (she thought she saw you but she actually saw someone else that looked like you).

Answer 6

Perception

Question 7

By way of example, consider Tina’s statement about stealing cash from the cash register. Let’s examine the testimonial capacities in light of her hearsay statement:

Maybe she said it was you (but she really meant to say Bob).

Answer 7

Narration

Question 8

By way of example, consider Tina’s statement about stealing cash from the cash register. Let’s examine the testimonial capacities in light of her hearsay statement:

Maybe she lied (she wanted you to get into trouble).

Answer 8

Memory

Question 9

In theory, when statements that would otherwise be excluded under the hearsay rule are admitted, they are admitted on the basis that the exceptions have “safeguards” against these testimonial capacities’ proclivities for inaccuracy. True or False.

Answer 9

True

Question 10

Step 1: Determine whether the evidence is a ________ as defined by Rule 801(a).

If YES, then goto step 2. If NO, then the evidence is not hearsay. Therefore, it is not excluded under the hearsay rule.

Answer 10

statement

Question 11

Step 2: Was the statement made at the _____ ____ or ______? FRE 801(c)(1)

If NO, then go to step 2. If YES< then the evidence is not hearsay.

Answer 11

current trial or hearing

Question 12

Step 3: Is the statement being offered to prove the ________ of the ______ _______ in the statement?

If YES, then go to step 4. If NO, then the evidence is not hearsay.

Answer 12

truth of the matter asserted

Question 13

Step 4: Does the statement meet one of the definitions of “______________” in Rule 801(d)(1)-(2)?

If NO, then go to step 5. If YES, then the evidence is not hearsay BECAUSE the rule says it is not.

Answer 13

non-hearsay

Question 14

Step 5: Does the statement meet an ______ to the rule excluding hearsay? FRE 803, 804, 807.

If NO, then go to step 6. If YES then the evidence is NOT EXCLUDED by the hearsay rule.

Answer 14

exception

Question 15

Step 6: The statement will be _______ by the hearsay rule. FRE 802. STOP

Answer 15

excluded

Question 16

The starting point on any analysis is the determination of whether a particular pice of evidence is _________ by using the definition in the rule.

Answer 16

hearsay

Question 17

The Rule Against Hearsay.

What rule?

Answer 17

FRE 802

Question 18

This rule provides that hearsay is not admissible unless one of a number of conditions is met.

Answer 18

FRE 802

Question 19

The starting point is whether the piece of evidence is __________ as defined by FRE 801.

Answer 19

hearsay

Question 20

The starting point is whether the piece of evidence is hearsay as defined by FRE 801. Next, if it is hearsay, you must determine whether one of the conditions is met that would permit its admission. Rule ______ tells us that hearsay will not be admissible unless any of the following provide otherwise:
1.
2.
3.

Answer 20

802

1. federal statute
2. federal rules of evidence or
3. other rules prescribed by the Supreme Court

Question 21

Before you can determine what is NOT hearsay, you must determine what is hearsay. !!

Answer 21

!!

Question 22

At the most basic level, for evidence to be considered hearsay, it must satisfy four requirements of Rule 801:
1. ?
2.
3.
4.
If all four of these requirements are not met, then the statement is not considered Hearsay.

Answer 22

1. It must be a statement FRE 801(a)

Question 23

At the most basic level, for evidence to be considered hearsay, it must satisfy four requirements of Rule 801:
1.
2. ?
3.
4.
If all four of these requirements are not met, then the statement is not considered Hearsay.

Answer 23

2. The statement must have been made by a declarant FRE 801(b)

Question 24

At the most basic level, for evidence to be considered hearsay, it must satisfy four requirements of Rule 801:
1.
2.
3. ?
4.
If all four of these requirements are not met, then the statement is not considered Hearsay.

Answer 24

3. The statement must have been made out of court FRE 801(c)(1) AND

Question 25

At the most basic level, for evidence to be considered hearsay, it must satisfy four requirements of Rule 801:
1.
2.
3.
4. ?

If all four of these requirements are not met, then the statement is not considered Hearsay.

Answer 25

4. It must be offered for the truth of the matter asserted in the statement. FRE 801(c)(2).

Question 26

Rule 801(a) defines a statement as a ________ oral assertion, written assertion, or nonverbal conduct if the person intended it as an assertion.

Answer 26

person’s

Question 27

Rule 801(a) defines a statement as a person’s _______ ________, _______ _______, or ________ ________ if the person intended it as an assertion.

Answer 27

oral assertion
written assertion
nonverbal conduct

Question 28

Rule 801(a) can be broken down into three parts:
1.
2.
3.

Answer 28

1. Who made the statement?
2. What kind of statement is it? and
3. Is it intended as an assertion

Question 29

Rule 801(a) the first inquiry, who made the statement? is usually easy to ascertain. The “who” must be a person and this person is what the rule calls a _______.

Answer 29

declarant

Question 30

Rule 801(b) defines the _________ as the person making the statement in question.

Answer 30

declarant

Question 31

Rule 801(b) defines the declarant as the person making the __________ in question.

Answer 31

statement

Question 32

Assume Officer Jones wrote a police report. The report said that Sam, the victim, told Officer Jones that “The truck rear-ended me.” At trial, Officer Jones testifies as to what Sam told him at the scene of the accident.

Who is the declarant

Answer 32

The declarant is Sam, not the police officer.

We are concerned with who made the statement being offered. In this case, Sam’s statement, “The truck rear-ended me.” Is being offered, so he is the declarant under 801(b).

Question 33

What about a parrot?

Answer 33

A parrot, that repeats what a human said, cannot produce hearsay.

Question 34

What about a printout? It comes from a computer, doesn’t it? And a computer clearly isn’t a person. But the answer depends on the _______ of the information.

Answer 34

source

Question 35

Consider a spreadsheet that reflects data entered by a person. yes, it’s still a printout but it was generated by a person and the printout reflects the statement of the person. The spreadsheet would be considered a ________ by a person.

Answer 35

statement

Question 36

Automated Printouts: maybe a stock report or measurements from a weather station; or a list of telephone calls made from a particular phone number. These examples would or would not be considered statements?

Answer 36

WOULD NOT
They do not come from a person as required by the rule.

Question 37

The next inquiry is “What kind of statement is it?” One can usually discern whether we are dealing with an _______, _______ or _______ ________. The more difficult part is discerning whether the statement meets the final requirement of 801(a), which we discuss next.

Answer 37

oral,

written,

non-verbal communication

Question 38

The last requirement of this part of the rule is that the statement be intended as an _________.

Answer 38

assertion

Question 39

Determining whether an _______ has been made can be challenging.

Answer 39

assertion

Question 40

An ____________ is an intent to communicate something.

Answer 40

assertion

Question 41

Do not make the mistake of thinking that questions can never be assertions. Some questions, particularly rhetorical questions, do not seek information but rather, are intended to be _________.

Answer 41

assertions

Question 42

If Tom says, “I saw the dog bite the child,” then the assertion intended by Tom is pretty clear.

What is it?

Answer 42

He is trying to convey what he saw.

Question 43

If Tom says, “What time is it?”

Is this an assertion?

Answer 43

NO, some might say that he is asserting that he does not know the time. But, that is incorrect. There is NO assertion here.

Question 44

By definition, the determination of whether or not something is an assertion is _________.

Answer 44

subjective

Question 45

The rule defines a statement as one in which the person _________ it to be an “____________”

Answer 45

intends

assertion

Question 46

The bottom line of assertions is whether a _______ intended to ________ something.

Answer 46

person

communicate

Question 47

Now, if you have determined that the evidence in question is a statement and have determined who the declarant is, the next step is to determine whether the statement was made ______ of the ______ ______ _______ where it is being offered. For this we turn to Rule 801(c)(1).

Answer 47

outside
current court proceeding

Question 48

FRE 801(c)(1) provides that in order for the evidence to be hearsay, it must be a statement that was not made at the _______ ________ or _________.

Answer 48

current trial or hearing

Question 49

Suppose there is a wreck involving two people at an intersection. Immediately after the wreck, a witness named Judy is standing next to her friend Cindy. The following dialogue occurs at the scene of the accident:

Judy: Did you see that? The little silver car just ran that red light and hit that truck.

Cindy: No, it didn’t. The little silver car had the green light.

Scenario 1: At trial, Cindy is on the witness stand and says, “The light was green when the little silver car went through the intersection.”

Answer 49

In Scenario 2, the statement contained in quotations would NOT meet the definition of a hearsay statement per FRE 801(c)(1) because Cindy made that statement at trial.

That is, Cindy testified as to what she personally observed at the time of the accident.

Question 50

Suppose there is a wreck involving two people at an intersection. Immediately after the wreck, a witness named Judy is standing next to her friend Cindy. The following dialogue occurs at the scene of the accident:

Judy: Did you see that? The little silver car just ran that red light and hit that truck.

Cindy: No, it didn’t. The little silver car had the green light.

Scenario 2: At trial, Judy is on the witness stand and says, “Cindy told me the little silver car had the green light.”

Answer 50

However, In Scenario 2, Judy’s statement is considered hearsay. Why? Because she is not testifying as to what she saw at the accident scene.

Rather, she is testifying as to what Cindy had told her at the scene.

So, Cindy’s statement to Judy was not made at the current trial or hearing. Therefore, Cindy’s statement meets the definition of 801(c)(1).

Question 51

Suppose there is a wreck involving two people at an intersection. Immediately after the wreck, a witness named Judy is standing next to her friend Cindy. The following dialogue occurs at the scene of the accident:

Judy: Did you see that? The little silver car just ran that red light and hit that truck.

Cindy: No, it didn’t. The little silver car had the green light.

Scenario 3: Cindy, a witness on the stand at trial says, “I told Judy that the light was green when the car went through the intersection.”

Answer 51

It might seem like this would not meet the definition of hearsay since Cindy is testifying as to what she had told Judy at the time of the accident.

However, this IS considered a hearsay statement under 801(c)(1) because she was testifying at trial about her statement outside of court to Judy.

If Cindy had simply testified that she observed that the light was green when the silver car went through the intersection, her testimony would not be hearsay.

Question 52

A few states view this concept of an out-of-court statement differently. If an out-of-court statement is repeated in court by the same person, then the statement will not be considered hearsay. This is NOT the practice in federal courts. !!

Answer 52

!!

Question 53

Once it has been determined that a particular statement does in fact, meet the out-of-court statement requirements, you must then analyze whether the statement meets the final requirement under 801(c)(2): Whether the statement is offered for its _________.

Answer 53

truth

Question 54

Rule 801(c)(2) provides that for a statement to be hearsay, it must be offered in evidence to _____ the truth of the matter asserted in the statement.

Answer 54

prove

Question 55

Rule 801(c)(2) provides that for a statement to be hearsay, it must be offered in evidence to prove the ______ of the matter asserted in the statement.

Answer 55

truth

Question 56

Scenario 3: Cindy, a witness on the stand at trial says, “I told Judy that the light was green when the car went through the intersection.”

The critical question you must be able to answer is why a particular statement is being offered. Why would you be offering the statement from Scenario 3?

Suppose this is a lawsuit and your client has been sued for negligence.

A key fact might be the color of the light when your client drove through the intersection. If so, it is imperative that the color of the light, at the time your client drove through the intersection, be admitted to evidence. That color was green.

You would be offering the statement, “The light was green when the car went through the intersection.” for ______ _________; the light was, in fact, green.

Answer 56

its truth

The color of the light is essential to prove the defense in a negligence case (that the light was, in fact, green), thus the statement is hearsay because it is being offered for the truth of the matter asserted.

Question 57

Any case has certain fundamental issues:
1. ?
2.
3.
4.

Answer 57

1. If civil, the essential elements of the cause of action

Question 58

Any case has certain fundamental issues:
1.
2. ?
3.
4.

Answer 58

2. If criminal, the elements of the crime charged

Question 59

Any case has certain fundamental issues:
1.
2.
3. ?
4.

Answer 59

3. The elements of any defense or affirmative defense; and

Question 60

Any case has certain fundamental issues:
1.
2.
3.
4. ?

Answer 60

4. The credibility of each witness.

Question 61

Knowing why (the purpose) a particular statement is offered is essential to the determination of whether the statement is being offered to prove the substance of the statement. !!

Answer 61

!!

Question 62

There are many reasons that a statement may be offered that have nothing to do with the truth of the matter asserted in the statement. There are six basic reasons (or purposes) that a statement might be offered for a reason other than the truth of the matter asserted:
1. ?
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Answer 62

1. To show the effect on the listener

Question 63

There are many reasons that a statement may be offered that have nothing to do with the truth of the matter asserted in the statement. There are six basic reasons (or purposes) that a statement might be offered for a reason other than the truth of the matter asserted:
1.
2. ?
3.
4.
5.
6.

Answer 63

2. As a verbal act

Question 64

There are many reasons that a statement may be offered that have nothing to do with the truth of the matter asserted in the statement. There are six basic reasons (or purposes) that a statement might be offered for a reason other than the truth of the matter asserted:
1.
2.
3. ?
4.
5.
6.

Answer 64

3. As verbal parts of an act

Question 65

There are many reasons that a statement may be offered that have nothing to do with the truth of the matter asserted in the statement. There are six basic reasons (or purposes) that a statement might be offered for a reason other than the truth of the matter asserted:
1.
2.
3.
4. ?
5.
6.

Answer 65

4. For impeachment purposes

Question 66

There are many reasons that a statement may be offered that have nothing to do with the truth of the matter asserted in the statement. There are six basic reasons (or purposes) that a statement might be offered for a reason other than the truth of the matter asserted:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5. ?
6.

Answer 66

5. As circumstantial proof of state of mind

Question 67

There are many reasons that a statement may be offered that have nothing to do with the truth of the matter asserted in the statement. There are six basic reasons (or purposes) that a statement might be offered for a reason other than the truth of the matter asserted:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6. ?

Answer 67

6. To prove knowledge

Question 68

There are many reasons that a statement may be offered that have nothing to do with the truth of the matter asserted in the statement. There are six basic reasons (or purposes) that a statement might be offered for a reason other than the truth of the matter asserted:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Answer 68

1. To show the effect on the listener
2. As a verbal act
3. As verbal parts of an act
4. For impeachment purposes
5. As circumstantial proof of state of mind and
6. To prove knowledge

Question 69

Suppose you are challenging the credibility of a witness. Consider the following scenario:

Scenario 4: Willy witnesses a shooting. After the shooting, he tells his friend Trent, “The shooter was wearing a grey sweatshirt and a baseball cap.”

At trial Wally testifies that the shooter was “wearing a green sweatshirt.”

Now you might want to offer the statement from Wally to Trent for a _______ ________. But suppose you want to demonstrate that Wally’s testimony about the shooter wearing a green sweatshirt is not to be believed. In that case, you would be offering the testimony to _______ the witness.

Maybe it was dark out, maybe Wally’s vision was not so great. Regardless of the reason, you want to demonstrate that the testimony of Wally at the trial (that the shooter was wearing a green sweatshirt) is inaccurate.

One way to impeach him is to demonstrate that he told someone outside of court something completely different.

This out-of-court statement, that the “shooter was wearing a grey sweatshirt” is being offered to impeach Wally. In that scenario, it is NOT hearsay because it is not being offered for the _____ of the _____ _______.

Answer 69

Different purpose

Impeach

Truth of the matter asserted

Question 70

Suppose you represent a client who has a grandfather with mental faculties on the decline. You wish to get him help, but state law requires a finding of incompetency before the state will provide help. As your client’s lawyer, you must prove that your client’s grandfather has mental issues. As part of your case, you have evidence that each morning your client’s grandfather would walk outside of his home and greet passerby with a bow and introduce himself as King Henry, Iv. You might find this hard to believe, but your client’s grandfather is not King Henry, Iv. His name is John Anderson. At trial, you wish to introduce the testimony of a neighbor who would walk his dog every morning in front of John’s home. He will testify that every morning, John would bow and say, “Greetings from the Kingdom, I am King Henry, IV.” It is your position that the statement will provide some evidence as to John’s mental state.

Look at the rule and how we would analyze this statement.

Answer 70

The statement, “Greetings from the Kingdom, I am King Henry, IV” was made in front of John’s house which is outside of the current trial or hearing.

The next question is for what purpose is it offered? Is it offered for the truth of the matter asserted? If so, what is the assertion? The assertion that “I (John) am King Henry, IV.” So, if you are offering it for the truth of the matter asserted, you would be offering it to prove that John was, in fact, King Henry, IV. BUT you are NOT.

You are offering it to prove only that he made such a statement. Period. Therefore, it cannot be hearsay.

You are NOT offering it for the truth of the matter asserted. You are offering the statement because you want the court to find that John believed it.

If he believed the statement, it would constitute some evidence that he was mentally incompetent.

Question 71

A statement can only be _________ if it is offered for the truth of the matter asserted.

Answer 71

hearsay

Question 72

This is probably the easiest example of a statement offered for something other than the truth of the matter asserted.

Answer 72

To show effect on the listener

Question 73

This is the easiest because the description means what it says. When offering a statement not for the truth of the matter asserted, but rather for the effect on the listener then by definition the statement is NOT ________.

Answer 73

hearsay

Question 74

Suppose John walks into a bar holding a gun, points it at Darrell and says, “I’m going to kill you.” Before John can pull the trigger, Darrell pulls a gun and shoots John. At Darrell’s trial for the murder of John, he seeks to introduce the statement that John made. In this case, it is being offered not for its truth that John was going to kill Darrell. Rather, it is being offered to show the ________ on Darrell (the listener) that he was in fear of his life when he shot John (which would be important if he was pleading self-defense.)

Answer 74

effect

Question 75

The term ______ _______ refers to statements to which the law attaches rights or obligations simply because they were spoken.

Answer 75

verbal acts

Question 76

The term verbal acts refers to _________ to which the law attaches ______ or _______ simply because they were spoken.

Answer 76

statements

rights or obligations

Question 77

Verbal Acts (Legally Operative Words) and Verbal Parts of an Act
The fact that the statement was made has legal significance; when statements are offered for their truth, the relevance of the statement is tied to its _________.

Answer 77

veracity

Question 78

When a statement is offered as a _____ _____, whether or not it is true is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is whether or not the words were spoken.

Answer 78

verbal act

Question 79

When a statement is offered as a verbal act, whether or not it is true is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is whether or not the _____ ____ _____.

Answer 79

words were spoken

Question 80

The verbal part of an act consists of an act which includes both a _______ part and a ______ part.

Answer 80

conduct part
verbal part

Question 81

The ______ part may compliment, or complete the ______ part .

Answer 81

verbal

conduct

Question 82

The conduct and the verbal utterance must be made by the same person. True or False.

Answer 82

True

Question 83

Examples of Verbal Acts (Legally Operative Words) and Verbal Parts of an Act:
1. ?
2.
3.
4.

Answer 83

1. Statements with legal significance

Question 84

Examples of Verbal Acts (Legally Operative Words) and Verbal Parts of an Act:
1.
2. ?
3.
4.

Answer 84

2. Statements made during the course of a criminal act

Question 85

Examples of Verbal Acts (Legally Operative Words) and Verbal Parts of an Act:
1.
2.
3. ?
4.

Answer 85

3. legal instruments

Question 86

Examples of Verbal Acts (Legally Operative Words) and Verbal Parts of an Act:
1.
2.
3.
4. ?

Answer 86

4. ambiguous acts

Question 87

David says to Peter, “I will mow your lawn for $65.” Peter says, “Deal!” At the trial for breach of contract, Peter offers David’s statement. Would this statement be hearsay?

Answer 87

No because David’s statement was a verbal act; it was an offer.

There is legal significance attached to the speaking of the words, so David’s statement does NOT constitute hearsay.

Question 88

Donny walks into a bank and says, “I have a gun. Give me all of the money in the till.” ________ _______ attaches to the words being spoken. Whether or not he actually had a gun (the ________ of the ____ _______) does not matter. Rather, Donny’s spoken words constitute a ________ ________ and are not _________.

Answer 88

legal significance

the truth of the matter asserted

criminal act

hearsay

Question 89

_______ that have been written on a bank account have been held to “fall squarely in this category of legally-operative verbal acts that are not barred by the hearsay rule.” When offering ______ into evidence, they will not be considered hearsay.

Answer 89

checks

checks

Question 90

Words which accompany _________ ______ might be verbal acts. For example, assume that Drew is on trial for trespass because he spent the night, unannounced, at Paula’s house. Drew testifies that once, when visiting Paula, she said, “Whenever you are in town, feel free to stay at my place.” Drew is offering the statement of Paula as a defense to the trespass case. Under these circumstances, Paula’s statement would be an example of a verbal act and would NOT be hearsay.

Answer 90

ambiguous acts

Question 91

Ambiguous Acts:
Other examples of verbal acts may include statements regarding:
1. ?
2.
3.
4.
5.

Answer 91

1. the making of a gift

Question 92

Ambiguous Acts:
Other examples of verbal acts may include statements regarding:
1.
2. ?
3.
4.
5.

Answer 92

2. the offering of a bribe

Question 93

Ambiguous Acts:
Other examples of verbal acts may include statements regarding:
1.
2.
3. ?
4.
5.

Answer 93

3. fraud

Question 94

Ambiguous Acts:
Other examples of verbal acts may include statements regarding:
1.
2.
3.
4. ?
5.

Answer 94

4. perjury

Question 95

Ambiguous Acts:
Other examples of verbal acts may include statements regarding:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5. ?

Answer 95

5. defamation

Question 96

On occasion, out-of-court statements may be offered to ________ the testimony of a live witness.

Answer 96

impeach

Question 97

The critical inquiry here is: What am I trying to prove here? Or, to put it another way, for what purpose is the evidence offered? If could be that you believe the witness is _______, has a poor _______, has terrible ______ or _______, or a myriad of other reasons that the witness’s testimony is not accurate. So, if you are trying to demonstrate that the witness’s testimony is not accurate, then you are offering an out of court statement to prove that – inaccuracy (__________), not for the truth of the matter asserted.

Answer 97

untruthful

memory

vision or hearing

impeachment

Question 98

Suppose that witness testifies that the man running down the back alley was wearing a blue sweatshirt. And suppose that she previously told a friend that the man was wearing a green sweatshirt. You offer evidence that the statement that witness told her friend. It is an out of court statement, so hearsay might be implicated. But why are you offering the statement? if you are offering it to prove the sweatshirt was green, then WOULD IT BE CONSIDERED HEARSAY?

Answer 98

It would be considered hearsay because you are offering it for the truth of the matter asserted.

Question 99

Suppose that witness testifies that the man running down the back alley was wearing a blue sweatshirt. And suppose that she previously told a friend that the man was wearing a green sweatshirt. You offer evidence that the statement that witness told her friend. It is an out of court statement, so hearsay might be implicated. But why are you offering the statement? if you are offering it to prove the sweatshirt was green, then it would be considered hearsay because you are offering it for the truth of the matter asserted. On the other hand, if you are offering it to show that her testimony about the color of the sweatshirt is ________ then it is NOT _______ because you are offering it to _____ the witness’s testimony with her prior inconsistent statement.

Answer 99

inconsistent

Hearsay

impeach

Question 100

Statements which are used to show a person’s ______ of _______ are not hearsay because they are not offered for the truth of the matter asserted.

Answer 100

state of mind

Question 101

Let’s say your neighbor, David Smith, goes around telling everyone that he is the famous movie star, Jean Claude Van Damme. Of course, he isn’t, I know that, you know that, but unfortunately, he doesn’t know that.

Your neighbor’s kids are trying to get him committed. They have to prove he’s a bit nuts. As evidence that David Smith is leaning towards the coo-coo side of things, the kids offer the statement that he told you, “I’m Jean Claude Van Damme. You should see me in my most recent movie.” So, why is the statement offered?

Answer 101

It would likely not be offered for the truth of the matter asserted, because if it were it would be offered to prove that your neighbor is, in fact, Jean Claude Van Damme. However, it is more likely that being offered to prove his state of mind at the time he made the statement.

Therefore, the statement would not be hearsay.