HEARSAY EXAM ALL POSSIBLE (ACTUAL 2025/2026) QUESTIONS WITH ACCURATE CORRECT ANSWERS | GRADED A+

HEARSAY EXAM ALL POSSIBLE (ACTUAL 2025/2026) QUESTIONS WITH ACCURATE CORRECT ANSWERS | GRADED A+ Why do we have a hearsay rule? How does it affect the fact-finding process? The jury can't judge hearsay very well b/c it consists of a statement that we are not watching being made. So we can't judge 4 things: memory, sincerity, perception, and narration. We usually judge those things by listening to testimony and cross-examination. We can't cross-examine the declarant. And even if the witness happens to be the declarant, we did not see her say the statement in context. We need contemporaneous observation and cross-examination. Without that, we do not have a reliable basis to make a determination. There are about 30 exceptions to the hearsay rule. Another reason for the hearsay rule is the 6th Amendment: "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right . . . to be confronted with the witnesses against him . . . ." If the witness and the declarant are the same person (i.e., if the witness is testifying about her own out-of-court statement), why should the statement ever be classified as hearsay? The difficulty is that the out-of-court statement is still twice removed from the event. Certainly, because the witness is the one who made the out-of-court statement, it is possible to conduct some cross-examination about he veracity of the statement, but the passage of time between the making of the statement and its repetition in court still presents a problem. Our memories of events are affected by subsequent events, and this is especially true when people have vested interest in a particular version of the event, as is the case at trial. Or perhaps it would have been possible to judge the sincerity of the statement if we had been present when it was first made, but by the time he repeats it in court, he has prepared himself more effectively to hide any dishonesty. Even if the witness and the person who made the out-of-court statement are the same person, the "twice-removed" issue makes it more difficule to assess the veracity of the statement.