Which scenario is typically treated as non-hearsay for purposes of the evidence rules?

Which scenario is typically treated as non-hearsay for purposes of the evidence rules?

• A. A Witness Repeats an Out-of-Court Statement to Prove Its Truth
• B. A Witness Tests About the Effect on the Listener
• C. A Witness Repeats a Rumor to Prove Its Accuracy
• D. A Witness Offers a Prior Inconsistent Statement to Prove Truth

Answer: (B)

Non-hearsay covers statements offered to show their effect on the listener rather than to prove the truth of the matter asserted. In this scenario, the witness is recounting what was said to them to show how it affected them—the reaction or mental state of the listener. That purpose is not about evaluating the truth of the out-of-court statement, so it falls outside hearsay. By contrast, the other possibilities aim to prove the actual content or truth of the statement (whether the rumor was accurate, what the prior statement asserted as true, etc.), which makes them hearsay unless a specific exception applies.

Non-hearsay covers statements offered to show their effect on the listener rather than to prove the truth of the matter asserted. In this scenario, the witness is recounting what was said to them to show how it affected them—the reaction or mental state of the listener. That purpose is not about evaluating the truth of the out-of-court statement, so it falls outside hearsay.

By contrast, the other possibilities aim to prove the actual content or truth of the statement (whether the rumor was accurate, what the prior statement asserted as true, etc.), which makes them hearsay unless a specific exception applies.