1504

The judge should sustain it. This is an assertion offered by plaintiff for its truth to prove the truck was speeding. It does not fit  under 801(d)(1)(B) because the defense has not suggested fabrication or a motive to testify falsely. To the contrary, she suggested that Turner had poor memory because of his head injuries.

Questions? Email tanford@indiana.edu and refer to 1504.

In some states, prior consistent statements that were made prior to the inconsistent one are admissible not for their truth but to demonstrate the witness’s credibility. If inconsistent stories show a speaker to be not credible, then logically speaking, keeping one’s story consistent should bolster credibility.

If we are in one of those jurisdictions, may the plaintiff prove the prior consistent statement by using a police report? When you think you know the answer, click here.