0613

The response should have three parts.

Part one is negative -- why this evidence does not fall under the character evidence rule.

Part two is positive -- what issue other than propensity is it relevant to?

Part three is procedural -- what rule allows it?

For example:  “In this case, we are not offering evidence of Jane’s character as a bad driver to prove that she drove badly on this occasion. Instead, we offer it to show that she was a well-known bad driver to whom it was negligent to entrust a car. Rule 405(a) says that when character is admissible, it may be proved by reputation.”

Questions? E-mail tanford@indiana.edu and refer to 0613.

What other objection could the defendant have made? When you think you know the answer, click here .