Rule 613 permits examination about prior inconsistent statements without first showing the statement to the witness. Extrinsic evidence requires an opportunity to explain unless the statement qualifies under Rule 801(d)(1)(A).
Sworn prior statements may be substantive evidence.
Alternative Names:
Prior Inconsistency|Inconsistent Statement
Why it Matters?
Sworn inconsistent statements from a deposition or prior proceeding are substantive evidence rather than merely impeachment, which means the jury may accept the earlier version as true rather than only discrediting the current testimony. Unsworn statements impeach only. That distinction affects both the limiting instruction and how counsel may argue the prior statement in closing.
Frequently Confused with
Related terms
Frequently asked questions
Are prior inconsistent statements substantive evidence?
Must the statement be shown to the witness first?
