Hearsay can be a difficult topic for some students, but it’s very understandable once it clicks. If hearsay confuses you don’t worry; sooner or later there will be a light bulb moment when it suddenly just makes sense, so let’s try to help you get there quicker.
What Is Hearsay?
Hearsay is defined as an out of court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted (you’ve probably heard and read this definition a million times).
To me this was always just kind of a fancy sounding statement that never really meant a whole lot on its own, and it was more of a definition that I just memorized. But what does it actually mean?
It’s All About The Why
The key to understanding the concept of hearsay is to ask yourself why the statement is being introduced. The fact pattern will tell you that a witness in court is describing a statement another person made outside the courtroom. The key is to identify why the side attempting to introduce the out of court statement wants it to be introduced. Do they want the out of court statement to be introduced because it is a true statement of fact? If so, then the statement would be hearsay. Or do they want the out of court statement to be introduced for some other purpose? If that’s the case then the statement would not be hearsay. Let’s take a look at some examples that will hopefully shed some light on this idea.
Example 1: The defendant seeks to show that the plaintiff is out of touch with reality. The defendant calls a witness to the stand who testifies that last month she heard the plaintiff say, “I am better at basketball than Lebron James AND smarter than Stephen Hawking.” Is this out of court statement being introduced to prove the truth of the matter asserted (that the plaintiff is actually better at basketball than Lebron James and smarter than Stephen Hawking)? No, that’s absurd. But it is being introduced for another purpose, which is to show that the plaintiff is delusional. As such, this statement is NOT hearsay. As you can see, it’s not about the what (the what being the statement), but rather the why (why the statement is being introduced).
Example 2: The defendant claims that he could not have participated in a meeting because he had such a severe case of strep throat that day that he was physically unable to speak. The plaintiff wants to disprove this claim, so he calls a witness to the stand who testifies that on that very day she overheard the defendant say, “my butt is itching like crazy, and I took a shower.” Once again, let’s ask ourselves why this statement is being introduced. Is this statement being introduced to prove the truth of the matter asserted, that the defendant did in fact have an itchy butt? No. Perhaps he did have an itchy butt, but that’s not why the plaintiff is introducing this statement. It is being introduced for another purpose, which is to show that the defendant was able to speak on that day (contrary to what the defendant claimed). Therefore the statement is NOT hearsay.
Example 3: The plaintiff claims that the defendant stole his plastic Ravishing Rick Rude wrestling figure from the plaintiff’s office. The plaintiff calls a witness to the stand, and the witness testifies that last week the janitor said to her (referring to the defendant), “I saw him take the plastic Ravishing Rick Rude wrestling figure from the office the other day.” Why is the plaintiff introducing this statement? He’s introducing this statement to prove that the defendant did in fact steal his plastic Ravishing Rick Rude figure. In other words, it is being introduced to prove the truth of the matter asserted. Therefore this statement IS hearsay, and it will not be admissible unless it falls under a hearsay exception (a separate topic we will cover in a different post).
Understand
- Hearsay is defined as an out of court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted.
- The key is to identify why the party attempting to introduce the out of court statement wants it to be introduced.
- If the out of court statement is being introduced as evidence that the statement itself is true, it is hearsay and thus inadmissible (unless it falls under a hearsay exception).
- If the out of court statement is being introduced for a different purpose (as evidence of the declarant’s state of mind, for example), the statement is not hearsay and it will be admissible.
Please feel free, as always, to leave a comment if you have any thoughts or questions, and best of luck 🙂