Answer A is incorrect. It correctly states that the evidence is inadmissible, because inquiry into specific instances of conduct in areas that do not involve dishonesty is generally improper. However, it incorrectly states the appropriate rule with regard to prior bad acts. Prior bad acts cannot be proven by extrinsic evidence. They can only be inquired about on cross-examination when the act involves dishonesty, for the purpose of impeaching the credibility of the witness under Federal Rule 608.

Answer C is incorrect. The evidence is inadmissible because it inquires into a specific instance of conduct which is unrelated to the credibility of the witness. The choice correctly states that the prosecution can ask about specific instances of conduct on cross-examination, but omits the limitation that the conduct must relate to dishonesty, and is therefore a wrong answer choice.

Answer D is incorrect. The evidence is inadmissible because the question inquires into specific instances of conduct which are unrelated to the honesty of the witness. It does not provide the foundation for any kind of admissible evidence. Extrinsic evidence of the specific instance of conduct is inadmissible under all circumstances.