To: NormsRevenge
We might as well take 'Wigmore on Evidence' and replace it with 'Imus on Evidence,'" Fitzgerald said, referencing the classic treatise on evidentiary law. "There's no Imus exception to the hearsay rule. This has no business in a federal court." I sure hope the judge didn't rule that Libby can't use Mitchell's words to impeach her if she is inconsistent on the stand. That's always fair game. He perhaps can't use it as direct evidence, but for impeachment of credibility.
36 posted on
02/08/2007 6:33:40 PM PST by
Defiant
(Hillary 2008: Because America needs a nude erection, not an Obama Nation.)
To: Defiant
I sure hope the judge didn't rule that Libby can't use Mitchell's words to impeach her if she is inconsistent on the stand. That's always fair game. He perhaps can't use it as direct evidence, but for impeachment of credibility. I would think that such evidence would have to be introduced while the witness in question is on the stand, since its evidentiary value lies not in the truth of the statements made, but rather in the fact that statements were made.
53 posted on
02/08/2007 8:42:44 PM PST by
supercat
(Sony delenda est.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson