When a statement is deliberately accusatory, or when the declarant knows that the statement is likely to be used in the prosecution of the defendant for a crime, the need for face-to-face confrontation is at its highest.
42.
The declarant's reflective powers must be stilled, meaning that, while making the statement, the declarant would not have had a chance to reflect upon the startling event, fabricate a purposefully false statement, and then say it.
43.
The declarant's reflective powers must be stilled, meaning that, while making the statement, the declarant would not have had a chance to reflect upon the startling event, fabricate a purposefully false statement, and then say it.
44.
Firstly, the stipulation for the buyer to complete the export declaration can be an issue in certain jurisdictions ( not least the European Union ) where the customs regulations require the declarant to be either an individual or corporation resident within the jurisdiction.
45.
"Rather, the relevance of the prior consistent statement is more accurately determined by evaluating the strength of the motive to lie, the circumstances in which the statement is made, and the declarant's demonstrated propensity to lie ."
46.
The Rule permits the introduction of a declarant's consistent out-of-court statements to rebut a charge of recent fabrication or improper influence or motive only when those statements were made before the charged recent fabrication or improper influence or motive.
47.
A "'present sense impression "', in the law of evidence, is a statement made by a person ( the declarant ) that conveys his or her sense of the state of an event or the condition of something.
48.
Another incentive for attorneys to make sure that the text of a declaration precisely matches the declarant's recollection is that the witness may be subject to impeachment at trial if the discrepancies between the declaration and any later testimony turn out to be significant.
49.
Now that they are again back in play, how can we be sure that they have turned a new leaf, and shall no longer treat every declarant as a potential tax evader ? These are hard issues and will need concerted attention over a long time period.
50.
The Eighth Circuit upheld his conviction five years later on the grounds that " [ a ] bsent fundamental ambiguity or impreciseness in the questioning, the meaning and truthfulness of the declarant's answer is for the jury . " The Supreme Court declined to hear the case.
