P sues D for injuries resulting from a boating accident. After P has described the circumstances surrounding the accident on direct examination, D’s attorney on cross-examination proves that P was mistaken when she said that D’s boat was powered by a Johnson outboard motor by showing her a picture of the boat on which there was a Mercury outboard motor. D’s attorney also shows that the accident occurred thirty minutes later than P testified it occurred. In rebuttal, P’s attorney calls P’s clergyman to testify that he has known P for twenty years, and that in his opinion P is a truthful person. The trial judge should hold that testimony:
A. Admissible to show that P is an honest person.
B. Inadmissible because the clergyman’s statement does not discuss P’s reputation for truth and veracity.
C. Admissible to show that P is habitually honest.
D. Inadmissible because P’s character was not attacked.
{ 12 comments }
