Multistate Bar Examination Practice Question

For a prior inconsistent statement to be introduced for impeachment, fairness often requires that the witness be given an opportunity to explain or deny the inconsistency. This procedural safeguard ensures that the witness has a fair chance to address the conflicting statement. Notarization is irrelevant to the admissibility of prior inconsistent statements, as evidentiary rules prioritize other factors, such as relevance and procedural fairness. Regarding relevance, the statement does not need to pertain solely to key facts of the case to be admissible. Lastly, while a written statement referring to a material inconsistency is important, admissibility depends on satisfying the foundational requirements, such as providing the witness an opportunity to respond.