Under Rule 613, a prior inconsistent statement can be used to challenge a witness’s credibility, provided what opportunity?

• A. It can be used to rehabilitate credibility only by introducing new favorable evidence.
• B. A prior inconsistent statement can be used to challenge a witness’s credibility, with opportunity to explain or deny the statement.
• C. It cannot be used if the witness testifies.
• D. It requires the statement to be in writing.

Answer: (B)

When you impeach a witness with a prior inconsistent statement, the key requirement is to give the witness a chance to explain or deny the statement. This rule protects fairness by allowing the witness to provide context, clarify a misunderstanding, or offer a reason for the discrepancy. It helps the jury assess credibility with the explanation in mind, rather than presenting a raw, potentially prejudicial inconsistency.

The statement being used to impeach doesn’t have to be in writing, and the witness can be impeached even if they are currently testifying. The central point is the opportunity to explain or deny, which is what makes the impeachment appropriate under Rule 613.