TTTBE #13: Early Answer for Patrons (Patreon)

This was a question regarding the "excited utterance" exception to the hearsay rule where a man observing an accident shouted out "Holy crap! That guy was going a hundred miles an hour" just after an accident and a woman, not looking at the scene, heard the man's excited utterance.

The answer to the question was (A) -- that the trial court will likely allow both the woman and the man to testify.   The man can testify because he's a witness testifying as to what he observed.

For the woman to testify about what the man saw is, of course, classic hearsay.  (This makes answer "B" incorrect -- which I don't think anyone guessed anyway.)  The statement is hearsay because it is being introduced into evidence for the truth of the proposition asserted.

Ordinarily, hearsay is inadmissible.  However, an excited utterance is one of the classic exceptions to hearsay set forth in Rule 803 of the Federal Rules of Evidence.  We discuss the reasons for this exception on Tuesday's episode.

Thomas answered "D" -- that the statements do not fit any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule -- and thus got this question incorrect, and is now 7-for-13 (54%) and slightly despondent about things.  (Oh, and answer "C" was indeed ridiculous.  I don't think anyone guessed it, either.)

Most of our listeners had the same dilemma as Thomas; which is to say that they analyzed the question properly and were torn between "A" and "D."

As always, stay tuned for another question when Question #14 drops along with Friday's Epsiode 48.  Here's a secret:  Question #14 is about the tort of the intentional infliction of emotional distress, something we haven't discussed on the show yet!  We hope you enjoyed playing along with TTTBE; please keep playing!