Truth of the Matter Asserted | Understanding Hearsay (Finally)

Finally! Truth of the Matter Asserted explained! Hearsay is an out-of-court statement that is being offered into evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.

But, what does "truth of the matter asserted" actually mean?

Fortunately, in this video, the fog around this hearsay topic is finally lifted. With hearsay examples and cases, you'll see an easy way to challenge and support hearsay objections.

_____________________________________________________________________

This is an online course that will take you step-by-step through all of the stages of trial and will arm you with the tools needed to thrive under the pressure!

_____________________________________________________________________

⭐⭐ The Objection Cheat Sheet has over 3,000 downloads! ⭐⭐

_____________________________________________________________________

If you have any questions, then please don't hesitate to ask! Be sure to subscribe and you can follow Jarrett Stone at:

_____________________________________________________________________
Now the boring stuff:

This is not legal advice. This content and all of Law Venture's content is for informational purposes only. You should contact your attorney to obtain legal advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Nothing here should be construed to form an attorney client relationship of any kind.

[devonnech]

I was sitting here for 30 minutes trying to digest the verbose explanation in this casebook until I tapped out and took to Youtube. This vid was a godsend. Cheers.

[LaineTheRealLifeLegallyBlonde]

I’m a 2L taking evidence rn and hearsay was giving me a lot of trouble but I think I FINALLY understand it! THANK YOU!!!

[kjkegari]

Unfortunately, I still don't understand truth of the matter asserted. I keep misidentifying what I think the TOTMA is when I'm doing practice questions. It's extremely frustrating.

[nicholasolsen]

yeah thanks, as a recent start up down the law path this was very helpful! This definitely showed me some clear examples of what TMA is and how to shell out the statement one bite at a time.

[careybogdanovic]

This was a good a video. Glad that u pointed out lawyers and judges get confused on this issue bc im in law school and find this concept the hardest so far. Bc u have go figure out first what is the truth of the matter asserted for the particular case and facts u have but then u have to compare and take what is being objected to and take that against what u say is the truth of the matter asserted. But if u cant get the first part——> what is the truth of the matter asserted, u r screwed! Then to compare that w reason u or opposing party is trying to bring in, can get confusing. Bc i always think we’ll ultimately it is being brought in for that reason, but not quite lol

[SomeofThisSomeofThat]

See Ross v. St. Augustine's College, 103 F.3d 338, 342 (4th Cir. 1996) ("Statements that contain direct observations of the physical appearance and actions of another person are not hearsay at all, but rather direct evidence of the facts in question”

The reasoning why testimony of a heated argument is not hearsay.

[aaronbowers]

I am experiencing a disconnect with your hypo about"timing being an issue" in regards to the hearsay statement. Dispatch relays to the officer that shots are fired at an address, and the prosecution is trying to offer that out-of-court statement not to prove the matter asserted (shots fired), but because the prosecution wanted to show how quickly the officer reacted to dispatch? Is the statement being introduced to show that the officer had a sense of urgency when coming to the scene because that's at issue in the case?

[iphub]

Thank you for your video. One question… wouldn’t a rental application be an assertion that the Defendant lived at the address and not just an assertion of contract terms? Why was this not hearsay, if you don’t mind elaborating. Thank you again.

[alansmithee]

So the matter asserted is the thing that the person offering the evidence is trying to demonstrate as true.
Hearsay is anything from a second hand (or more distant) source that is used in an attempt to do so.

E.g. if A hears B say event [1] happened, and A intends to demonstrate that [1] happened by giving B's statement as second hand testimony, this is hearsay.
It is not hearsay if:
1. B is on the stand and gives their own statement about [1] happening directly to the court.
2. A is only trying to demonstrate that B said [1] occurred, not that [1] actually did occur.

Am I getting this wrong?

[fieryweasel]

"Have you spoken to Bob since Christmas?"

"Yes, he texted me last weekend and said he made beef stew. Here's his text."

Here, they're not trying to offer into evidence that beef stew was made, just that communication happened between the two parties. The text could say that his pants didn't fit, or that his horse hates comedy movies. The content is irrelevant, the important part is that communication occurred.

[ABuddhistAndAJew]

Not a lawyer but I think I'm finally getting it. They love using this objection in media. I have a way that someone here could maybe check if this parses properly. If a statement is presented to imply a fact then its hearsay. If a statement is presented as a detail/explanation then it is, most likely, admissible. The problem with the split at the end is that the witness is saying she heard the victim use the name Ty implying the fact that she was on the phone with the defendant. The witness doesn't know this for a fact but is implying that it is likely a fact based on what she heard. If this statement could be connected to her own reaction in a relevant way it could be admissible similar to the shots fired statement but, since it is stated simply as a conclusion, there is an issue. Is that about right?

[libertatem_aut_mori_conatur]

if the proponent accentuates why he/she isn't using the statement(s), wouldn't that be a passive way to highlight the hearsay into evidence?

[Jp-bvyw]

Here after Darrell brooks kept saying Hearsay to every statement. He should have watched this

[robertdimuccio]

you might have a blue lives matter flag behind you but this video was really helpful

[TheSocratesofAthens]

In other words, the statement is true because I said so.