A hearsay rule is basically an out-of-court statement that is introduced in a bid to prove a matter that is mentioned within the statement. Hearsay evidence is inadmissible in a court of law.
However an exception may be made that will allow hearsay evidence to be admissible. This paper will discuss the hearsay rule paying specific attention to some exceptions to the rule.
Fishman (2012) wrote that the co-conspirator rule is a hearsay rule that will allow the statements and acts of one conspirator to be admitted into evidence during the trial of the other conspirator so long as the acts or statements were said or done during or after the act of conspiracy.
……………….middle of text…………….
the assertion will also be put in consideration. In Utah, if the declarant can be available for cross examination, either at the time of the trial or in a videotaped testimony or by closed-circuit the hearsay evidence may be admitted.
In the absence of the declarant for cross examination, the court will determine that the child is not available to testify. This decision may also be reached as a function of a medical report saying that the child may suffer emotional trauma due if required to relive the event during testimony (Fishman 2012).
Admissibility of evidence is a function of many in and out of court processes. Hearsay, like all other evidence must be scrutinized before it is admitted as evidence. It is however in many cases not admitted.
Fishman, C. S. (2012). A student’s guide to hearsay. New Providence: LexisNexis.
Are you ready to order a custom essay from us? Place your order with us today.