(a) Showingor Disclosing the Statement During Examination. When examining a witnessabout the witness?s prior statement, a party need not show it or disclose itscontents to the witness. But the party must, on request, show it or discloseits contents to an adverse party?s attorney.
(b) ExtrinsicEvidence of a Prior Inconsistent Statement. Extrinsic evidence of a witness?s prior inconsistentstatement is admissible only if the witness is given an opportunity to explainor deny the statement and an adverse party is given an opportunity to examinethe witness about it, or if justice so requires. This subdivision (b) does notapply to an opposing party?s statement under Rule801(d)(2).
2011 Advisory Committee Note.?The language of this rule has been amended as part of therestyling of the Evidence Rules to make them more easily understood and to makestyle and terminology consistent throughout the rules. These changes areintended to be stylistic only. There is no intent to change any result in anyruling on evidence admissibility. This rule is the federal rule, verbatim.
Original AdvisoryCommittee Note. ?This rule is the federalrule, verbatim. Subsection (a) abandons the position in Queens Case, 129 EnglishReports 976 (1820), requiring that the cross-examiner, prior to examining awitness about his written statement, must first show the statement to thewitness and is comparable to the substance of Rule 22(a), Utah Rules ofEvidence (1971). The substance of Subsection (b) was formerly in Rule 22(b),Utah Rules of Evidence (1971).