Could someone please explain to me how hearsay works? I’m following the Depp/Heard trial, and I’m so confused when one of them gets objected to for explaining something THEY said. I get that you can’t say what someone else told you because you didn’t see or experience it firsthand, but why can’t witnesses share what they themselves said? If you believe someone’s testimony, you’re taking them at their word for everything else that they say happened, so why not what they said, too?
In: 9
You actually kind of pointed to the entire basis of the rule: statements made outside of court are considered inherently unreliable precisely because they ARENT testimony: they aren’t made under oath and there was no criminal liability for lying at the time the statement was made.
Hearsay is an out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of whatever it asserts.
It doesn’t necessarily have to be the statement of another person. If the statement was an assertion and is being offered at trial as proof of what it asserts, it’s hearsay and inadmissible unless some exception to the hearsay rule applies, such as the statement is against the self interest of the person making it.
The reason a person’s own statements are often admitted is because they can be construed as being offered NOT as evidence of the truth of the statement in question, but as evidence of the state of mind of the person making the statement at that time.
Example:
Examining attorney: and what happened next?
Witness: I told JimBob ‘I just saw you hit that Cletus guy in the mouth
Opposing attorney: Objection. Hearsay.
Examining attorney: Goes to state of mind your honor.
If that statement was being offered as proof that the witness saw JimBob hit Cletus, it would be inadmissible hearsay.
If, instead, the statement is going to show that the witness was upset at the time of making the statement, it’s not being offered as evidence of truth of what the statement asserts, so it may be admissible.
Latest Answers