Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
In United States law, a declaration (or statement) against interest is an exception to the rule on hearsay in which a person's statement may be used, where generally the content of the statement is so prejudicial to the person making it that they would not have made the statement unless they believed the statement was true. For example, if a ...
Declaration against interest: A statement that would incriminate or expose the declarant to liability to such an extent that it can be assumed he would only make such a statement if it were true. It would be assumed that one would lie to further one's interests, so a statement against his interests (such as exposing oneself to criminal or civil ...
The "statements against interest" rule is different because: It is party neutral (the hearsay exemption is party-specific). The declarant must be unavailable. The statement must be against the penal interest (under federal rules of evidence) or the fiscal or social interest (under the rules of states not following the federal rules). The ...
In United States law, a statement against penal interest is a statement that puts the statement-maker at risk of prosecution.It is the criminal equivalent of a statement against interest, a statement a person would not normally make, which would put them in a disadvantaged position that they would have had if they had not made the statement in the first place.
"Hearsay is a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." [1] Per Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(a), a statement made by a defendant is admissible as evidence only if it is inculpatory; exculpatory statements made to an investigator are hearsay and therefore may not be admitted as ...
The destruction of Pan Am 103 was an attack on the United States. Of the 270 victims, 190 were American. The rest came from 20 other countries, including 43 people from the UK.
The Criminal Justice Act 2003 defines hearsay as statements "not made in oral evidence in the proceedings" being used "as evidence of any matter stated". [17] If the statements are being used for purposes other than serving "as evidence of any matter stated", they are not covered by the definition of hearsay in the 2003 Act. [18]
James won a $454 million civil fraud judgment against Trump, 78, earlier this year after accusing the real estate magnate of inflating his net worth by billions of dollars to get better loan and ...