Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: libravoter
No...because what he is testifying to is -his- conversation with someone. Now if he testified that John Doe said Terri said she was speeding THAT would be hearsay.

No, that would be double hearsay, hearsay within hearsay. The first example--Jane told me she was speeding--is hearsay.

93 posted on 03/25/2005 1:58:01 PM PST by Defiant (Amend the Constitution to nullify all decisions not founded on original intent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies ]


To: Defiant
No, that would be double hearsay, hearsay within hearsay. The first example--Jane told me she was speeding--is hearsay.

It depends on the purpose of the testimony. If John Doe testifies Jane said she was speeding, it is direct testimony to what Jane told John. It is hearsay evidence to Jane actually speeding.

Florida law allows direct testimony to the patient's EXPRESSED wishes. If Michael Schiavo was testifying to what Terri told Michael, it is direct testimony to their conversation.

I am not saying Michael is testifying truthfully, just arguing what type of testimony he gave.

104 posted on 03/25/2005 2:13:04 PM PST by libravoter (Live from the People's Republic of Cambridge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson