Conn. R. Evid. 8-8
When hearsay has been admitted in evidence, the credibility of the declarant may be impeached, and if impeached may be supported, by any evidence that would be admissible for those purposes if the declarant had testified as a witness. Evidence of a statement of the declarant made at any time, inconsistent with the declarant's hearsay statement, need not be shown to or the contents of the statement disclosed to the declarant.
Conn. Code. Evid. 8-8
COMMENTARY
The weight a fact finder gives a witness' in-court testimony often depends on the witness' credibility. So too can a declarant's credibility affect the weight accorded that declarant's hearsay statement admitted at trial. Consequently, Section 8-8 permits the credibility of a declarant, whose hearsay statement has been admitted in evidence, to be attacked or supported as if the declarant had taken the stand and testified.See State v. Calabrese, 279 Conn. 393, 409-10, 902 A.2d 1044 (2006) (evidence tending to show bias, prejudice or interest); State v. Mills, 80 Conn. App. 662, 667-68, 837 A.2d 808 (2003) (evidence of prior criminal convictions), cert. denied, 268 Conn. 914, 847 A.2d 311 (2004); cf. State v. Torres, 210 Conn. 631, 640, 556 A.2d 1013 (1989); State v. Onofrio, 179 Conn. 23, 35, 425 A.2d 560 (1979); State v. Segar, 96 Conn. 428, 440-43, 114 A. 389 (1921).
Treating the hearsay declarant the same as an in-court witness would seem to pose a problem when impeachment by inconsistent statements is employed. Section 6-10(b) provides that when examining a witness about a prior inconsistent statement, "the statement should be shown . . . or [its] contents . . . disclosed to the witness at that time.'' Showing or disclosing the contents of the inconsistent statement to the declarant will usually be impossible or impracticable because the declarant may not be a witness at trial (or may not be on the witness stand at the time the hearsay statement is offered). The second sentence in Section 8-8 relieves the examiner from complying with Section 6-10(b).
By using the terminology "[e]vidence of a statement . . . made at any time''; (emphasis added); Section 8-8 recognizes the possibility that impeachment of a hearsay declarant may involve the use of a subsequent inconsistent statement (i.e., an inconsistent statement made after the hearsay declaration statement to be impeached) See generally State v. Torres, supra, 210 Conn. 635-40 (statements made subsequent to and inconsistent with probable cause hearing testimony, which was admitted at trial, were used to impeach hearsay declarant).