A party's own statement may be admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2), but it must also be relevant and more probative than prejudicial. See United States v. Woo, 917 F.2d 96, 97-98 (2d Cir. 1990) (while affidavit and grand jury testimony of case agent "may well have been" a prior inconsistent statement, it was within the district court's discretion to exclude the evidence on the ground that its probative value was outweighed by the danger of prejudice or confusion of the issues, where evidence at issue "did not concern the core of the evidence against [the defendant] . . ."). In ruling that the tape was inadmissible, the District Court determined that there was no inconsistency between the government's statements at the arraignment and its positions at trial.

Moreover, although the parties may refer to other testimony from the first trial for purposes of impeachment, they must refer to that other testimony as coming from “a prior proceeding” (without mentioning that the “proceeding” was a trial).Cf. United States v. Woo, 917 F.2d 96, 97-98 (2d Cir. 1990) (finding that, although the affidavit and grand jury testimony of a case agent “may well have been” a prior inconsistent statement, it was within the district court's discretion to exclude the evidence on the ground that its probative value was outweighed by the danger of prejudice or confusion of the issues, where the evidence at issue “did not concern the core of the evidence against [the defendant] ....”]), accord, United States v. Gil, 298 Fed.Appx. 73, 76 (2d Cir. 2008) (“A party's own statement may be admissible under [Fed. R. Evid.] 801(d)(2), but it must also be relevant and more probative than prejudicial.”);

The party admission rule does not give parties a license to use an opponent's statement to introduce a "red herring." United States v. Woo, 917 F.2d 96, 98 (2d Cir. 1990) (holding that statement that might qualify as an admission was properly excluded on Rule 403 grounds); see also 5 WEINSTEIN'S FEDERAL EVIDENCE 801.30 [3]; 2 McCORMICK ON EVIDENCE 254 at 138. A party may make an admission "by adopting or acquiescing in the statement of another."