Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Pandacollector, post: 970991, member: 26583&quot;]Mr. Rim&#039;s:</p><p>Incidentally, your line of argument intrigued me so much that I found an article on hearsay called Hearsay and Its Exceptions by Prof. Miguel A. Méndez. Here is one quote: &quot;Out of court statements that are not offered for the truth of the matters stated are not hearsay. If prior statements of witnesses are “not hearsay,” some might be misled into believing that they cannot be offered for the truth. California avoids these pitfalls by remaining faithful to the Common Law tradition. If an out of court statement is offered for the truth of the matter stated, then it is hearsay and is not admissible unless it falls within an exception... In this respect, the Code, like the Common Law, is declaration centered. The focus is on whether the out of court declaration is being offered for the truth.&quot; I believe that by this standard my communications with Mr. aldergold were not hearsay since he replied to me in regards to selling his coin, not to assert ownership of it. What say you?</p><p>Best wishes,</p><p>Peter Anthony</p><p><a href="http://www.pandacollector.com/" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://www.pandacollector.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.pandacollector.com/</a>[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in