Also known as: character for truthfulness · FRE 608 · witness impeachment character
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
An evidentiary basis for attacking a witness's credibility that consists of proof the witness possesses a dishonest character. Reputation or opinion testimony about the trait is admissible once the witness's character for truthfulness has been attacked. Specific instances of conduct probative of the trait may be inquired into on cross-examination but may not be proved by extrinsic evidence.
Colin Chambers testified on direct about revenue calculations at his company. On cross-examination the opposing lawyer asked whether Chambers had skimmed cash from employee tips and failed to report the income. Chambers invoked the Fifth Amendment. The court sustained the objection because the question related solely to character for truthfulness and did not waive the privilege.
Corinne Cho testified that all patient data entries were accurate. The plaintiff called a former coworker who stated that among staff Cho was widely regarded as someone who altered records to hide negative results. The court allowed the reputation testimony because Cho's character for truthfulness had already been placed in issue by her own testimony.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Cynthia Cortez testified that she had logged every lab result correctly. Defense counsel sought to ask her on cross-examination about a prior performance review accusing her of deleting negative results. The court permitted the limited inquiry because the specific instance was probative of untruthfulness even though extrinsic proof of the review itself remained inadmissible.
Charles Cunningham testified that a colleague had always been trustworthy. The defense attempted to introduce the colleague's prior conviction to attack the colleague's character for untruthfulness. The court excluded the evidence because the colleague had never testified and therefore could not be impeached under the rule governing character for untruthfulness.
Chloe Chen testified against her former associates. The prosecution offered evidence that Chen and the defendant belonged to the same organization whose members were expected to lie for one another. The court admitted the evidence because it showed bias rather than a general character for untruthfulness.
Christian Coleman testified about events he claimed to remember. The defense sought to impeach him with prior inconsistent statements. The court allowed the impeachment even though Coleman had memory difficulties because the evidence still bore on his character for truthfulness and the accuracy of his current testimony.
Reputation or opinion evidence is admissible once the witness's character for truthfulness has been attacked. The evidence must concern the witness's reputation for truthfulness or untruthfulness or an opinion about that character.
No. Extrinsic evidence of specific instances is inadmissible to prove the character trait except for criminal convictions under Rule 609. Inquiry into such instances is permitted on cross-examination if the instances are probative of truthfulness.
No. A witness who testifies on another matter does not waive the privilege against self-incrimination for testimony that relates only to character for truthfulness.
The proponent must establish that the reputation existed in a relevant community and concerned the witness's character for truthfulness. Concerns about the basis of the reputation or possible bias go to weight rather than admissibility.
…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’…