Understanding Hearsay Evidence
90
What Is A Hearsay Statement?
Generally speaking, hearsay evidence is an out of court statement used to prove the truth of the matter asserted. Put simply, hearsay evidence is when a person testifies as to what someone else said in order to prove that what was said is the truth. Hearsay evidence does not have to spoken words, but can also be any statement found in a letter, email, public record or any other form of written communication. In general, hearsay evidence is inadmissible in a court of law. The rules of evidence require that the person who offered the statement testify to what they said themselves rather than have someone else repeat it in Court.
The Problem With Hearsay Evidence
The reason hearsay evidence is inadmissible in court is because someone testifying as to what someone else said is believed to be unreliable. Evidence given by a witness as to what someone else said and then speculating as to what the meaning of that statement means is the legal equivalent of spreading rumors. Under the law, unless the person who made the statement is available to testify as to what he or she said and state what was meant by the statement, the statement is considered unreliable and therefore, inadmissible in Court.
The rule against hearsay has its roots from the Kings Court in England. In those Courts, individuals were often convicted by hearsay statements. Often the memory and motives of human beings can be unreliable. In the Kings Court, many statements taken out of context or even fabricated were used to punish those who disagreed with the King and his policies. When the United States formed its own body of law, this practice was outlawed in the name of giving every defendant a fair trial.
|
|
ROLAND YOUNG HEARSAY EVIDENCE LP FLOW CHART RECORDS
Current Bid: $21.00
|
Exceptions To The Hearsay Rule
Every State in the country has its own rules of evidence on how to treat Hearsay Evidence. The general rule is that it cannot be used in trial to prove the truth of the matter asserted. But every state also has its own set of exceptions to the Hearsay Rule. Most model the exceptions found in the Federal Rules of Evidence.
The first and most important exception to the Hearsay Rule is the Party Admission Rule. This is when the statement being offered in Court is a statement of one of the parties in a lawsuit and the statement is adverse to the party who said the statement. For example, party A and party B are in a car accident. On the scene party B tells Witness W that he was talking on his cell phone and was distracted when he hit Party A. W then testifies in Court the statement made by Party B. Technically, this is a hearsay statement and is inadmissible. However, under the Party Admission Rule, the statement would be admissible in Court. The reasoning behind this rule is that people are accountable for what they say and evidence of a statement contrary to their own position is thought to be admissible.
Besides the Party Admission Rule, there are numerous other exceptions to the Hearsay Rule. These include business records, public records, excited utterances, family records and other records and statements that are thought to be reliable. The key to any exception to the Hearsay Rule is that the statement is reliable and not just rumor or innuendo.
|
The Hearsay Rule
Price: $49.00
List Price: $60.00 |
|
Hearsay Evidence in Criminal Proceedings (Criminal Law Library)
Price: $32.95
List Price: $52.00 |
Related Articles
- Legalize It Already!
I believe Marijuana should be legalized for many reasons. I am a single Mother with no health insurance and was diagnosed with Chronic Rheumatoid Arthritis at the age of 16. I also have anemia so the... - The Great Breast Augmentation Scandal
Monica Hansen was crowned Miss Norway in 1997. She stands six feet one inch tall and comes from the city of Tonsberg. Hansen entered the Miss Norway pageant as a joke but won easily. She did not however go on... - Defending Lawyers
Shakespeare suggested that the way to improve society was to "kill the lawyers." Many Americans today believe that Shakespeare was right. There is a sentiment by both Republicans and Democrats that lawyers...
PrintShare it! — Rate it: up down flag this hub
Comments
DM,
Your two reasons why hearsay evidence can't be used are exactly right. The exceptions are confusing. I spent half a semester in lawschool and weeks in bar prep trying to understand them all, to some avail. Funny part, in some states some of the exceptions are not exceptions just not considered Hearsay. The main point is to ensure statements made outside the courthouse are reliable. That is pretty much all you need to known.
Thanks for the comment.
Understanding Hearsay Evidence in the News
- Arguments RejectedMetropolitan News-Enterprise11 hours ago
Among the arguments rejected by the high court was that testimony by the prosecution’s DNA expert, who opined the DNA extracted from vaginal swabs taken from Tynan matched a sample of defendant’s DNA, violated the Confrontation Clause because it was testimonial hearsay within the meaning of Crawford v.
- Peterson attorneys seek notes of Savio statementChicago Tribune7 hours ago
Attorneys for Drew Peterson, charged with murdering his third wife Kathleen Savio, alleged in court Friday that a sworn statement she made to an insurance-company lawyer contradicts her account that Peterson broke into their home in 2002 and threatened her with a knife. Peterson's defense attorneys are seeking a copy of the notes made by an attorney working for Country Companies insurance ...
- Zulu king wins bull-killing caseBBC News14 hours ago
A bull-killing ritual will go ahead in South Africa after an animal rights group loses a legal bid to ban the practice.
- Court Rules Bare-Handed Bull Killing Can Proceed, SAPA ReportsBloomberg16 hours ago
Dec. 4 (Bloomberg) -- A South African High Court ruled that a ritual killing of a bull in a Zulu harvest festival can go ahead tomorrow, dismissing objections from an animal rights group, the South Africa Press Association reported, citing Judge Nic van der Reyden.
- Election board hears fall election complaintsThe Rebel Yell4 hours ago
Two accused students now serve in 40th Senate session The CSUN Elections Board heard the last of the arguments against fall election candidates, decided on three different cases and prepared for the executive board election. The board decided Nov. 19 on the complaints against new College of Urban Affairs senator Roma Patel, fine arts incumbent and winner [...]
- 'Allowing bull killing promotes tolerance'Independent Online9 hours ago
KZN premier Zweli Mkhize has said that the court ruling allowing Zulus to go ahead with their bare-handed ritual killing of a bull has paved the way for cultural tolerance.
- Austrian police arrest former Aspen socialite; she's wanted on murder chargesVail Daily9 hours ago
ASPEN - Aspen socialite-turned-fugitive Pamela Phillips has been captured. Phillips, who had been wanted since October 2008, was arrested Thursday in Austria, officials said. Arizona authorities believe she was behind the car-bombing death of her ex-husband, Gary Triano, in 1996. But it was a money laundering charge out of the country of Lichtenstein, located between Switzerland and Austria ...
- Study: Recession less severe in dairy countiesAG Weekly11 hours ago
TWIN FALLS, Idaho (AP) - The communities found in the heart of the Idaho dairy industry are, amid falling milk prices, weathering the recession better than other rural regions of the state, a new University of Idaho study says.










Dolores Monet says:
4 months ago
Glad you've explained some of the hearsay evidence business, bg. My husband and I often get into arguments while watching movies or TV on what constitutes hearsay evidence - it's the exceptions that confuse me. One big reason that they can't use hearsay evidence is probably because people could just lie. Or hear things wrong.