I agree that the way the wording went the other day it DID sound as if there had been a witness with a conviction of some sort. At any rate, no.
But there is the "admitted untruthfulness" aspect of today's comments to hash over!
That is confusing. The other day the judge made another statement about that
2.13. WE'VE HAD PRIOR CONSISTENT AND INCONSISTENT TESTIMONY BY BOTH HIMS AND HERS, SO 2.13 WILL BE GIVEN IN ITS ENTIRETY.