1706

This is 803(7), the absence of a business record.

There is probably an additional foundation required, beyond that needed for an affirmative business record -- showing that the matter omitted (mention of a second person in the room) was a kind of information that would regularly be included in the record if it had occurred.

Questions? Email tanford@indiana.edu and refer to 1706.

Now we turn to public and official records, rules 803(8)-(10). They are simpler than business records in some ways and more complicated in others. They are simpler because there is little foundation required -- proof that the record comes from government office, was prepared by a government official, and concerns a public (rather than a private) matter is enough. You do not have to establish when the report was made nor any kind of regularity. The rule is more complicated because it contains exclusions for police records used against a criminal defendant, and an expansion to include second-hand information obtained from people who are not associated with the government office preparing the report, if the report can be characterized as factual findings following an official investigation.

Go to problem 17D

In part one, the state offers a police forensics fingerprint report into evidence. The defendant objects that it is hearsay. If the state argues that the report fits the public records exception, what response can the defendant make? When you think you have the answer, click here.