Evidence keyed to Fisherback
0 of 5 questions completed
You have already completed the quiz before. Hence you can not start it again.
Quiz is loading…
You must sign in or sign up to start the quiz.
You have to pass the previous Module’s quiz in order to start this quiz:
you have successfully completed the quiz.
The defendant was on trial for trying to sell a stolen antique ring to an antique dealer. The defendant claims that she had bought the ring from a street vendor earlier on the day of her arrest. The prosecution calls to the stand a woman who had given a party in her home which the defendant attended, and who had discovered later that evening that her antique ring was missing from her bedroom. She seeks to testify that her friend, who is now backpacking in another country, told her three days after the party that she had seen the defendant the previous evening in a restaurant wearing a ring that looked exactly like the woman’s ring. The defense attorney objects.
The objection should be:CorrectIncorrect
While driving east on a two-lane highway, a pickup truck collided with a westbound motorcycle. The accident was observed by a cab driver. Because the cab driver had a passenger, she did not stay at the scene of the accident but made some notes shortly thereafter. She made her statement to the police the next day, in which she stated that just before the accident, the pickup swerved into the westbound lane, hitting the motorcycle. At the trial of the motorcyclist’s personal injury action against the truck driver, the cab driver was having difficulty remembering some of the facts. The motorcyclist’s attorney sought to let her review the notes she had made.
The court should rule this:CorrectIncorrect
During an arson trial, the defendant took the stand in her own defense and denied committing the crime. Her attorney asked her what she said to the police when she was first arrested, and she replied that she had told them that she knew nothing about the arson because she was in another state at the time.
Her answer should be:CorrectIncorrect
An employee of a grain company brought suit against his employer for injuries that he suffered in a fire and explosion in a grain elevator. The employer filed a counterclaim against the employee for damages, and alleged that the employee was contributorily negligent in that he cut through some electrical wires while working in the elevator, and the sparks from those wires caused the explosion. The employee denies these allegations. His employer calls the grain elevator operator, who was also working in the elevator, and he testifies that he helped the employee and his assistant out of the elevator soon after the explosion. The elevator operator intends to testify that, at that time, the assistant told him that the employee “should have been able to tell that that wire was hot.” The injured employee’s attorney objects to the elevator operator’s testimony concerning this conversation.
The trial judge should rule that the testimony is:CorrectIncorrect
A woman and her friend were driving to a ski resort in late December when the woman’s car was hit head-on by a pickup truck driven by driver. No one was injured, but the woman’s car was badly wrecked and the woman’s friend began to have nightmares about the accident. The woman alleges that the driver was driving without windshield wipers and that that was the cause of the accident.
A passenger in the driver’s car said to a pedestrian, who happened to be walking his dog at the scene of the accident, “We couldn’t see a thing; the wipers weren’t working.”
The pedestrian’s testimony concerning the passenger’s statement should be ruled:CorrectIncorrect