Prior Inconsistent Statements

Prior Inconsistent Statements

Communications made by a witness before the time he or she takes the stand to testify in an action that contradict subsequent testimony given on the same exact facts.

Prior inconsistent statements can be used in a lawsuit only to impeach (discredit) the trustworthiness of the witness' testimony. They cannot, however, be used to establish the truth of the matter they address.

The Federal Rules of Evidence govern the use of prior inconsistent statements in federal courts.

Mentioned in ?
References in periodicals archive ?
3) There are two types of prior statements: prior consistent statements (4) and prior inconsistent statements.
Ventris (2009), concerning the extent to which a witness may be impeached with prior inconsistent statements that were obtained in violation of the witness's constitutional rights, and other developments in federal case law, as well as the Congressional enactment of Rule 502, which sets forth new limitations on the waiver of the attorney-client privilege and work product protection.
2) The rule that prior inconsistent statements may not be used substantively as the sole evidence to convict applies to F.
Inventure's testimony from the five-year-old trial as prior inconsistent statements.
The court held that the out of court statement by the anesthesia technician intern at the hospital that "nobody was paying attention" to the patient when he stopped breathing was not admissible during the plaintiffs case-in-chief under any exception to the hearsay rule for prior inconsistent statements, and that the testimony in any event was conclusory and thus inadmissible.
Although prior inconsistent statements may generally be used for impeachment purposes,(89) the Federal Rules also permit a prior inconsistent statement of a witness to be used substantively, thereby excluding it from the hearsay rule, if it was given under oath at an official proceeding or deposition.
The book is broken into four major parts: Cross-Examination of Witnesses, Controlling the Cross-Examined Witness, Prior Inconsistent Statements, and Special Tools and Tactics.
It is necessary to interpret Rule 801(d)(1)(B)'s exclusion of some prior consistent statements from hearsay in relation to Rule 801(d)(1)(A)'s more significant exclusion of certain prior inconsistent statements from hearsay.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court addressed impeachment by prior inconsistent statements which fall under MRE 613.
The section on cross-examination will assist the reader in preparing to use prior inconsistent statements and learned treatises to impeach adverse witnesses.
The IDL greatly enhances the traditional uses of prior testimony-that is, locating and retrieving prior inconsistent statements or helpful admissions.