Also known as: truthfulness character · credibility character
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A witness trait regarding honesty that may be attacked or supported by reputation or opinion testimony. Specific instances of conduct may be inquired into on cross-examination when probative of the trait.
Connor Clark testified on direct about revenue calculations at his company. On cross-examination the opposing lawyer asked whether Connor had skimmed cash from a prior employer. Connor invoked the Fifth Amendment. The court sustained the objection because the question related only to character for truthfulness.
Catherine Carter testified for the plaintiff. The defense introduced opinion testimony that Catherine had a poor reputation for honesty among coworkers. The plaintiff then called a second witness who testified that Catherine enjoyed a good reputation for truthfulness in the same community.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Caitlin Crowley testified that she accurately recorded patient data. Defense counsel asked on cross-examination whether she had once altered lab results in a prior study to hide negative outcomes. The court permitted the question because the inquiry was probative of truthfulness and no extrinsic evidence was offered.
Christian Coleman testified for the prosecution. The defense called a coworker who stated his opinion that Christian was untruthful based on years of working together. The court admitted the opinion testimony to attack Christian's character for truthfulness.
Curtis Cannon testified against the defendant. The prosecutor elicited that Curtis belonged to a group whose members pledged to lie for one another. The court admitted the evidence because it showed bias bearing on Curtis's character for truthfulness.
Cassandra Cooper testified about the accuracy of company records. Defense counsel asked whether she had previously submitted false expense reports. The court allowed the limited inquiry because the conduct was probative of truthfulness and extrinsic proof was not introduced.
Reputation evidence is admissible to attack credibility at any time. Evidence supporting truthful character is admissible only after the witness's character for truthfulness has been attacked.
Supporting sources
No. Extrinsic evidence is prohibited. The examiner may inquire about such instances only on cross-examination when the conduct is probative of truthfulness.
Supporting sources
No. The privilege remains intact when the proposed testimony relates only to character for truthfulness and not to the substance of the direct examination.
Supporting sources
The character witness must have sufficient personal knowledge of the principal witness to form a reliable opinion about honesty. The opinion must address the trait of truthfulness or untruthfulness.
Supporting sources
…him about specific instances of past conduct, other than crimes covered by Rule 609, which are probative of his veracity or “character for truthfulness or untruthfulness.”[^maj-4] The Rule limits the inquiry to cross-examination of the witness, however, and prohibits the cross-examiner from introducing extrinsic evidence of the witness’…