🦅
Federal Evidence • Hearsay Exclusions
EVID#024
Legal Definition
A prior consistent statement is a hearsay exclusion. It is a statement offered to rebut an attack on a witness' credibility and is made before the motive to lie arose.
Plain English Explanation
A prior consistent statement is when someone tells the same story they told before, to show that they are telling the truth now. Sometimes in trials, lawyers will attack a witness by saying they have a reason to lie on the stand. This makes the jury think the witness can't be trusted. But if that witness made the same statement supporting their testimony before there was ever a reason for them to lie, this earlier statement helps show they are honest and reliable. The court allows using this kind of prior statement to rehab the witness's credibility with the jury and defend them against claims they recently fabricated their story.
Hypothetical
Hypo 1: Bob steals money from a bar on February 1st. Sam witnessed it happen. On February 2nd, Sam tells Amy what he saw Bob do. On February 3rd, Bob breaks into Sam's house and steals his TV. On February 4th, Bob is arrested. During Bob's trial for stealing money from the bar, the prosecutor calls Sam as a witness. Sam testifies that he witnessed Bob steal money from the bar. When Bob's attorney cross-examines Sam, he tries to attack Sam's credibility by pointing out that Sam has personal motivations to not like Bob related to the alleged TV theft, which may be why he is lying about seeing Bob stealing from the bar. The prosecutor calls Amy as a witness to testify about her conversation with Sam where he told her that he saw Bob steal from the bar. Result: The purpose of this statement isn't to establish that such claims are true, but to show that Sam had made a prior consistent statement to Amy before Bob stole his TV. In other words, it's unlikely that Sam is lying in court today because he is saying the same thing he said before he had a reason to personally dislike Bob. Thus, it is admitted.
Visual Aids
Related Concepts
Does California recognize the hearsay exclusion of a vicarious admission from a principal-agent?
How does the prior inconsistent statement hearsay exclusion differ in California?
How does the prior statement of identification hearsay exclusion differ in California?
What is an admission by a party-opponent?
What is an adoptive admission?
What is a prior inconsistent statement?
What is a prior statement of identification?
What is a vicarious admission from a co-conspirator?
What is a vicarious admission from an authorized spokesperson?
What is a vicarious admission from a principal-agent?
