Under FRE 613, which statement is true about using extrinsic evidence of a prior inconsistent statement?

Under FRE 613, which statement is true about using extrinsic evidence of a prior inconsistent statement?

• A. It may be admitted only after the witness has been given an opportunity to explain or deny.
• B. It may be admitted without any opportunity to explain.
• C. It may be used only if the prior statement was made under oath.
• D. It may be admitted only after the witness has testified to the prior statement.

Answer: (A)

The main idea here is how impeachment by a prior inconsistent statement works under FRE 613. Before you can admit extrinsic evidence of a prior inconsistent statement to prove its content, the witness must be given an opportunity to explain or deny that statement during examination. This sequencing protects the witness from being surprised and lets them clarify or correct the record before the more dramatic step of introducing external evidence. So, you first confront the witness with the prior statement and allow them to explain or deny it. If they do, you may later present extrinsic evidence (like a prior deposition or written statement) to prove the content of that prior statement for impeachment. If you skip that opportunity to explain or deny, extrinsic evidence of the prior statement is not typically admissible for impeachment. The rule doesn’t hinge on whether the prior statement was sworn; the crucial requirement is the opportunity to explain or deny before using extrinsic evidence.

The main idea here is how impeachment by a prior inconsistent statement works under FRE 613. Before you can admit extrinsic evidence of a prior inconsistent statement to prove its content, the witness must be given an opportunity to explain or deny that statement during examination. This sequencing protects the witness from being surprised and lets them clarify or correct the record before the more dramatic step of introducing external evidence.

So, you first confront the witness with the prior statement and allow them to explain or deny it. If they do, you may later present extrinsic evidence (like a prior deposition or written statement) to prove the content of that prior statement for impeachment. If you skip that opportunity to explain or deny, extrinsic evidence of the prior statement is not typically admissible for impeachment. The rule doesn’t hinge on whether the prior statement was sworn; the crucial requirement is the opportunity to explain or deny before using extrinsic evidence.