During a civil trial about property damage, a witness testifies that weeks before the incident, a neighbor (who is now unavailable to testify) confided in her, 'I never fixed the retaining wall because I knew it was likely to collapse.' The neighbor's statement is being offered to show that the retaining wall was negligently maintained. Should the statement be admitted as evidence?
Yes, the statement is admissible because its probative value in proving negligence outweighs its prejudicial effect.
No, the statement is inadmissible because it is hearsay not subject to any exceptions.
Yes, the statement is admissible because it constitutes a statement against the declarant's pecuniary or civil interest and the declarant is unavailable.
No, the statement is inadmissible because the declarant's motives or credibility cannot be sufficiently examined.
The correct answer is that the statement qualifies as a statement against interest and is admissible. A statement against interest is an exception to hearsay if it is so contrary to the declarant's pecuniary or civil interest that a reasonable person would not have said it without believing it to be true. Here, the neighbor's admission about neglecting the retaining wall could subject them to civil liability, meeting this criterion. The declarant’s unavailability further allows admission under this 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 a statement against interest?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What qualifies as an unavailable declarant?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
How does the hearsay rule affect evidence in court?