Limb (b) of FRE804(b)(1) at 4:58 - who has the opportunity and motive to "develop" the testimony at the prior proceeding? if that's the defendant, why would he want to develop the agent's testimony presumably that would be incriminating against him?
The opponent (if a criminal case, it could be the defendant) would have to have the opportunity and motive to CROSS examine the witness. The opponent, at least if skilled at cross, would not develop that direct (presumably harmful) testimony but CROSS.
Hi, I actually would love to ask you something regarding this. Do you have an email I can contact you through to see if you can perhaps give me some insight regarding hearsay exceptions. I’m currently facing trial for something and would like any information that can help. Thank you so much!
I hope you answer this...probably stupid question. If a defendant in a murder trial takes the stand can the defendant say what the victim said prior to the killing? I am not a law student and am arguing with someone that the defendant WON'T be allowed to say anything that the victim said. They are only allowed to say how the victim made them feel or how the victim expressed the words {angry, threatening(?)} The person I'm arguing with says the victim's words will be allowed. How can that be if the victim is dead and are there exceptions in a self defense case? It just seem logical that the victim's words, which weren't recorded, would be hearsay.
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
![Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) Rule 803(3) - ["Then existing"] State of mind](/img/1.gif)
Wow, this was incredibly well discussed, clear, and informative. Thank you for making my life a little bit easier! Keep doing what you're doing!
Glad it was helpful!
Thanks a lot, My professor made it seem a lot harder than it was .
Glad it helped!
Limb (b) of FRE804(b)(1) at 4:58 - who has the opportunity and motive to "develop" the testimony at the prior proceeding? if that's the defendant, why would he want to develop the agent's testimony presumably that would be incriminating against him?
The opponent (if a criminal case, it could be the defendant) would have to have the opportunity and motive to CROSS examine the witness. The opponent, at least if skilled at cross, would not develop that direct (presumably harmful) testimony but CROSS.
Hi, I actually would love to ask you something regarding this. Do you have an email I can contact you through to see if you can perhaps give me some insight regarding hearsay exceptions. I’m currently facing trial for something and would like any information that can help. Thank you so much!
I hope you answer this...probably stupid question. If a defendant in a murder trial takes the stand can the defendant say what the victim said prior to the killing? I am not a law student and am arguing with someone that the defendant WON'T be allowed to say anything that the victim said. They are only allowed to say how the victim made them feel or how the victim expressed the words {angry, threatening(?)} The person I'm arguing with says the victim's words will be allowed. How can that be if the victim is dead and are there exceptions in a self defense case? It just seem logical that the victim's words, which weren't recorded, would be hearsay.
The victim’s words most likely won’t be allowed
helpful, thank u!