Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Criminal Law Blogs -> Gideon’s Guardians

Criminal Law

: Gideon’s Guardians

From the Mouths of Babes - Evidence Rule 613 vs. 801(d)(1)(A)

I recently helped Professor Janet with one of her classes. One of the things the kids had to work on was laying a foundation for impeachment by prior inconsistent statements. They had to unlearn some previous (not Janet's) mis-teaching, but one thing they always got out was that the witness was under oath and subject to perjury. I usually ask that as part of cluing the witness in to where they were when they made the statement, but I didn't think it was a necessary part of the foundation.So I've relearned where that came from.Impeachment using prior inconsistent unsworn statements comes in under Rule of Evidence 613, and can only be used as impeachment evidence, not as substantive guilt/innocence evidence.Impeachment using prior inconsistent sworn statements comes in under Rule of Evidence 801(d)(1)(A), and can be used both as impeachment evidence, and as substantive guilt/innocence evidence...continue to full post

Full post as published by Gideon’s Guardians on February 14, 2007 (boomark / email).