Evidence-Wellborn SU2006 Outline

Rule 801d1c permits showing that a witness identified

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: peachment on the ground that she is going to $5,000 from the crime stoppers but only if Campbell is convicted. Problem is none of the statements were shown to be made before she knew about the $5,000 Tome if you don't meet the pre-motive requirement, it's not admissible period! Consistent statements have to be made by the same witness! Note on page 126: Missouri Pacific v. Vlach Impeachment on ground of improper influence that happened...lawyer for plaintiff, during cross-examination of railroad witnesses had tried to convey the inference that there was some conspiratorial railroad meeting where they conveyed their purpose D's lawyer wants to show that the railroad witnesses said the same things before this alleged orchestral event...they could have let that in except for one thing: They allowed the witnesses to be excused and were no longer subject for recross-examination. Witnesses must be subject to cross-examination concerning the prior statement or it can't be let in! Prior Statements: Identification of...
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online