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 ?
The district court substantially covered Savage's requested instruction by warning the jury to scrutinize all witness testimony, especially the testimony of biased or hostile witnesses, and specifically instructed the jury that it could take prior inconsistent statements into account when considering witness credibility.
asked about their prior inconsistent statements, the examiner must
(36) See R v B (KG), [1993] 1 SCR 740, 19 CR (4th) 1 (recognizing exceptions to the "orthodox rule that prior inconsistent statements are admissible only to impeach the credibility of a witness, and not as evidence of the truth of their contents" at 755, cited to SCR).
(3) There are two types of prior statements: prior consistent statements (4) and prior inconsistent statements. (5) Military Rule of Evidence 613 details the rules for examining a witness on a prior statement and when extrinsic evidence of a prior inconsistent statement may be admitted.
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.S.
Under the common law, prior inconsistent statements were admissible to impeach a witness's testimony at trial.
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.
However, some states, such as Connecticut, have permitted prior inconsistent statements to be used substantively in such situations.
If you have opportunities for cross involving prior inconsistent statements, Iannuzzi's treatment of the topic may make this book worth reading.
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.