Rule 608: A Witness's Character for Truthfulness or Untruthfulness

A witness's credibility may be attacked or supported by testimony about the witness's reputation for having a character for truthfulness or untruthfulness, or by testimony in the form of an opinion about that character. Evidence of truthful character is admissible only after the witness's character for truthfulness has been attacked. Except for a criminal conviction under Rule 609, extrinsic evidence is not admissible to prove specific instances of a witness's conduct in order to attack or support the witness's character for truthfulness. The court may, on cross-examination, allow inquiry into specific instances of a witness's conduct if they are probative of the character for truthfulness or untruthfulness of the witness or another witness whose character the witness being cross-examined has testified about.

• 1Character for truthfulness can be attacked with reputation or opinion testimony under 608(a)
• 2Bolstering (truthful character evidence) is only allowed after the witness's truthfulness has been attacked
• 3Specific instances of dishonest conduct may be asked about on cross-examination under 608(b)
• 4No extrinsic evidence of specific acts — the cross-examiner is stuck with the witness's answer
• 5Criminal convictions are the exception — they can be proved with extrinsic evidence under Rule 609

• The extrinsic evidence ban under 608(b) — cross-examiner must accept the witness's answer about specific acts
• Distinguishing 608(b) specific-acts impeachment from 609 conviction impeachment and 613 prior inconsistent statements
• Whether a particular act is probative of truthfulness or untruthfulness (lying, fraud, cheating vs. violence, drug use)
• When bolstering testimony becomes permissible — only after an attack on truthfulness