Top Law Schools

If you had to explain it to a 5 year old, what's the difference between hearsay exclusions and exceptions? I know they are in two different FRE articles, but why? Is there any policy reason/rationale behind this? I know it's not crucial for the exam but I just want to understand it just so it may all click more. Thanks.

Hearsay exclusions are definitionally not hearsay. They can be offered for any purpose that comports with the other rules of evidence. Hearsay exceptions allow evidence that is definitionally hearsay to be offered for the truth of the matter asserted.

I think if you think of them in a criminal context, it is easier to understand. (Although they are applicable in civil cases too).

The hearsay exclusions are statements that are direct evidence of the defendant's guilt, so it doesn't matter if they are said out of ct, the ct wants to hear them.

They are COPPP

Co-conspirators (statements by co-conspirators) made during a conspiracy in furtherance of the conspiracy
Opponent Party Admissions- Statements of admission made by the adversary party
Prior consistent statements
Prior Inconsistent statements
Prior IDs

(for the P statments to come in the declarant must have made the statement during testimony + and the defendant must have had the opportunity to cross examine them.

I mean if you think about how important those are in a criminal case, doesn't it make sense, that the court doesn't care that they were said out of court. These are all statements, that if true go directly to the defendant's guilt. If the defendant made a statement to a friend, about how he got into the victim's house the night that he is accused of buglarly, of course the fact that the defendant is not going to take the stand isn't going to prevent the court from considering that evidence at trial.

The hearsay exceptions are statements that if true, are circumstantial evidence. None of the statements that are deemed as hearsay exceptions go to the direct guilt of the defendant. They go more to the circumstances surrounding defendant's guilt (i.e. present sense of impression, state of mind) even if those statements come in, they don't inform you of the defendant's guilt, rather they just give you more information about the circumstances of the crime.

Thanks, that really helps!! Mystery solved, finally.