A witness is called to testify about an accident they heard about from a friend. The opposing attorney objects, claiming the testimony is inadmissible. What is the most appropriate reason for sustaining the objection?
The witness has not been qualified as an expert in accident reconstruction.
The testimony is irrelevant to the case at hand.
The testimony violates attorney-client privilege.
The witness lacks firsthand knowledge of the events they are testifying about.
For testimony to be admissible under the requirement of personal knowledge, the witness must have directly observed or experienced the event or fact at issue. In this case, the witness is relying on secondhand information, which does not establish personal knowledge. Witness testimony based on what a third party shared is considered hearsay unless it falls under a hearsay exception.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What is meant by firsthand knowledge in legal testimony?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What is hearsay and why is it generally inadmissible in court?