The Arsonist’s Admission: Hearsay, Non-Hearsay and Confrontation on the UBE October 2020 Exam MEE 2 (Evidence)
Bar Exam and Chill por Bar Exam and Chill
Notas del episodio
Episode Overview
In this episode, we break down a complex criminal arson case involving three distinct evidentiary hurdles. We analyze why a defendant’s own "risky" phone call gets into evidence, why a waiter’s shady offer stays out, and why a dead investigator’s report creates a constitutional crisis for the prosecution. This is a masterclass in distinguishing between 801(d) exclusions, 804(b) exceptions, and the Confrontation Clause.
Podcast Show Notes
I. Introduction
- The Scenario: A restaurant owner is charged with arson. The business was failing, and the fire looks suspicious.
- The Evidence Checklist: 1. The Bartender’s testimony (Owner’s phone call). 2. The Bartender’s tes ...
Palabras clave
Bar ExamBar PrepUBEEvidenceMEEHearsayParty Opponent AdmissionStatement Against InterestNon-HearsayConfrontation Clause