After a defendant's opinion character witness testifies that the defendant is honest, which rebuttal item is least likely to be admissible: bias evidence, a specific-act truthfulness attack, the defendant's contrary reputation, or the witness's reputation for untruthfulness?
Recommended code
31010406
Source code
31010406
Official key
B
Review status
seed candidate needs human review
Presentation of Evidence > Witnesses > Truthfulness
Barnabas is on trial for embezzlement from a small coastal bakery. His first witness, Ruth, the bakery's longtime bookkeeper, testifies that in her opinion Barnabas is honest and trustworthy. The prosecution does not cross-examine Ruth, and she is excused from further attendance. Which rebuttal item is least likely to be admissible?
01 Lock the call: the question asks for the least likely admissible rebuttal item.
02 Classify the attack before applying a rule: witness bias, witness truthfulness, defendant character rebuttal, or witness reputation.
03 Cut A because the $7,500 testimony proves bias or motive, not character for truthfulness.
04 Cut C because the defendant opened the character door with opinion testimony, allowing opposite-trait reputation rebuttal.
05 Cut D because FRE 608(a) allows reputation or opinion proof about a witness's truthfulness.
06 Choose B because it is extrinsic evidence of a specific act offered to attack Ruth's truthfulness, which FRE 608(b) bars.
A / trap
Testimony by Barnabas's former business partner that he overheard Ruth offer to provide favorable testimony if Barnabas would pay her $7,500.
This is the dominant trap. A pay-for-testimony offer shows bias, motive, or interest to lie. It is not a character-for-truthfulness attack, so the FRE 608(b) extrinsic-evidence bar does not block it.
B / correct
Testimony by Ruth's former co-worker that Ruth had submitted fabricated inventory counts eighteen months ago.
This is extrinsic evidence of a specific past act offered to attack Ruth's character for truthfulness. FRE 608(b) bars that proof route, so this is the least likely rebuttal item to be admissible.
C / trap
Testimony by a sheriff's deputy that Barnabas has a long-standing reputation in the community for dishonesty.
Barnabas opened the character door by offering opinion testimony that he is honest. The prosecution may answer with reputation evidence for the opposing trait.
D / trap
Testimony by a fellow church choir member that Ruth has a long-standing reputation in the community as an untruthful person.
Reputation or opinion testimony about a witness's character for truthfulness is allowed under FRE 608(a). Ruth does not need to be back on the stand for that witness-reputation proof.
Red axis: Use-before-rule: identify what the rebuttal proof is being used to show before naming FRE 608(b).
Purple profile: The answer set gives three admissible rebuttal routes and one inadmissible truthfulness-specific-act route.
Blue signal: Money for favorable testimony points to bias or motive; fabricated inventory counts point to character for truthfulness.
Orange repair: Student habit to repair: treating every extrinsic witness attack as a FRE 608(b) problem.
Gold Key / GK-EVIDENCE-WITNESS-SPECIFIC-ACT-01
Extrinsic evidence of a witness's specific acts is not admissible to attack or support the witness's character for truthfulness.
Gold Key / GK-EVIDENCE-BIAS-MOTIVE-EXTRINSIC-01
Bias, motive, or interest to testify in a particular way is separate from character for truthfulness; extrinsic evidence of bias is admissible.
Gold Key / GK-EVIDENCE-WITNESS-REPUTATION-01
A witness's credibility may be attacked by reputation or opinion testimony about the witness's character for truthfulness.
Silver Key / SK-EVIDENCE-OPENED-DOOR-01
When a defendant opens the character door by opinion testimony, the prosecution may rebut with reputation evidence of the opposite pertinent trait.
01 Name the witness being attacked before naming the rule.
02 Sort each rebuttal item into bias, truthfulness reputation, specific truthfulness act, or opened-door character rebuttal.
03 Say why the money offer is bias, not FRE 608(b).
04 Say why fabricated inventory counts are specific-act truthfulness evidence.
05 Pick the only barred proof route and bank the Gold Key.
Specific Act Bar
A witness is excused. The prosecution offers a former co-worker to prove the witness falsified inventory counts eighteen months ago. Is that admissible to attack truthfulness?
No. It is extrinsic evidence of a specific act offered to attack character for truthfulness, so FRE 608(b) bars it.
Bias Split
The prosecution offers testimony that a witness requested money in exchange for favorable testimony. Is FRE 608(b) the blocker?
No. That proof shows bias, motive, or interest to lie. It is not a character-for-truthfulness specific-act attack.
Opened Door
The defendant offers opinion testimony that he is honest. May the prosecution call a reputation witness for dishonesty?
Yes. The defendant opened the character door, so the prosecution may rebut with reputation evidence for the opposite pertinent trait.