AEMILIUS PAULUS ~:” Thus, her proposed testimony is Hearsay. Granted her proposed testimony is Hearsay the next question would be is there an exception? There may be a “Spontaneous Statement” exception that applies to what she is saying thus allowing escape from the Hearsay Rule.”
All telphone communications are hearsay .
The fact that she is testifying about a phone call makes it even less legally binding ~ it is “second-hand hearsay”.
The credibility of her statments is only as accurate as her character .
One question I would want to ask ‘Dee Dee’/Rachel : Did Treyvon ever give you some jewelry ?
Excellent question.
The Spontaneous Statement exception to the Hearsay rule has been around for years. It is when the person testifying in court as to the content of the hearsay is testifying to an unavailable persons out of court statements which describe or narrate a relevant series of events at or near the time they occurred. Now that I state it I can’t remember now if the person relating the hearsay must have been relating what a percipient witness saw I think so. In this case Martin would be a percipient witness narrating an ongoing event to the “mystery” witness. I’m aware of a case where the judge admitted a witness’ testimony where the witness was relating a description by a missing percipient witness as to how an accident occurred. If I have not grossly forgotten the rule I think the girls testimony is admissible. In a real world this girls credibility would be zero. I guess Florida allows depositions in criminal cases and this girl if I remember correctly was hidden from the defense-with the courts approval!