0805

There are two ways of responding to an objection under Rule 407 (this principle will also apply to Rules 408-411):

(A) that the evidence does not fit the definition of a subsequent remedial measure, or

(B) that it falls into one of the exceptions, e.g., that it is not primarily relevant to show the forbidden purpose (the defendant’s culpability), but to prove one of the issues listed as exception, such as that the defendant owned or controlled the equipment.  

The first response requires that you read the text of the rule closely and literally.

The second response requires that you think through what issues other than culpability are being genuinely contested, and make a logical argument as to how this evidence helps prove that other issue..
If your response was an argument that this evidence does not fit the definition of a subsequent remedial measure, click here to continue. If not, go back and think of one and then continue.