TITLE EIGHT — HEARSAY
Rule 806. Attacking and Supporting Credibility of Hearsay Declarant
Credibility Attack. When a hearsay statement has been admitted in evidence, the declarant’s credibility may be attacked, and then supported, by any evidence that would be admissible for those purposes if the declarant had testified as a witness. The court may admit evidence of the declarant’s inconsistent statement or conduct, regardless of when it occurred or whether the declarant had an opportunity to explain or deny it. If the party against whom the statement was admitted calls the declarant as a witness, the party may examine the declarant on the statement as if on cross-examination.
Scope. This rule applies to a declarant of a statement admitted under Rule 803 or Rule 804, to a declarant of a statement admitted as an opposing party’s statement under Rule 801(4)(b), and to a declarant of a statement admitted for a purpose other than truth to the extent the declarant’s credibility bears upon that purpose.
Methods Available. Subject to subdivision (5), the credibility of a declarant may be attacked by:
evidence of the declarant’s reputation for untruthfulness, as Rule 608(1) permits;
evidence of the declarant’s bias, prejudice, interest, motive, or relationship to a party;
evidence bearing upon the declarant’s capacity or opportunity to perceive, to remember, or to recount the matter asserted, including the declarant’s condition at the time of perception and the circumstances of the perception;
evidence of a prior statement or of conduct of the declarant inconsistent with the statement admitted; and
evidence that the declarant is unidentified, or that the identity of the person who composed and transmitted a statement through an account has not been established.
No Foundation Required. Because the declarant has not testified, the foundation ordinarily required by Rule 613(1)(a) does not apply, and an inconsistent statement or conduct may be proved by extrinsic evidence without first affording the declarant an opportunity to explain or deny it. Rule 613(1)(d), concerning extrinsic evidence upon a collateral matter, applies.
Limits Carried Over. A method of attack that would be unavailable against a testifying witness is unavailable against a declarant. In particular:
specific instances of misconduct are not admissible to attack or to support credibility, as Rule 608(2) provides; and
Supporting the Declarant’s Credibility. Evidence of a declarant’s truthful character is admissible only after the declarant’s character for truthfulness has been attacked, as Rule 608(1) provides. A prior consistent statement of the declarant is admissible only as Rule 613(2) permits.
Calling the Declarant. A party against whom a hearsay statement has been admitted may call the declarant as a witness and examine the declarant upon the statement as if on cross-examination. Calling the declarant under this subdivision does not make the declarant that party’s witness for the purpose of Rule 607, and does not waive any objection to the admission of the statement.
Where the Source Is Not a Person. Where evidence admitted is output generated without the intervention of a person, and is therefore not a statement under Rule 801(1)(c), it is not attacked under this rule. Its reliability is attacked by evidence directed to the process or system that produced it, including evidence of error, malfunction, incomplete capture, deletion, alteration, or tampering, and by the matters governed by Rule 901(2)(g), Rule 1108, and Rule 1109.