Cassidy Hutchinson did NOT testify the Secret Service told her that Trump...

[Kingofalldems]

grabbed the steering wheel and then assaulted the driver.

FACT.

[Ocelot II]

1. No, she said Tony Ornato told her.

The conversation took place in front of the driver, who did not deny it.

[Tomconroy]

2. She never testified that she was told tfg actually touched anyone.

[mackdaddy]

3. I think it was the lead SS Agent. Another agent was driving, I think.

That was how I understood it. It was the lead SS agent that trump tried to strangle, and was in the office quiet and "discombobulated" as she was being told the story by Tony Ornato.

[Tomconroy]

5. She never said anything about strangling.

[mackdaddy]

10. Ok. "reached for his clavical region".

but that seems like what you would do if you were going to choke or strangle someone....

[Tomconroy]

13. You are drawing conclusions. You have to stick to her exact words.

I'll look again but I think she described the SS guy as pointing towards his clavicle when he told her the story.

[mackdaddy]

30. SS guy did not tell her the story directly.

He was just sitting there as the deputy chief of staff Tony Ornato recounted the story. Not sure who pointed to their clavicle. Exact words as you say.

[Stallion]

7. Non Verbal Communication Can Be Admitted Under Certain Circumstances

people can testify to what they saw or heard or smelled or perceived etc. A nod of the head in response is one example

[FBaggins]

14. Not from a hearsay witness

A court would never have allowed the testimony when the person she says told her could be called to testify

[Stallion]

15. She Is Testifying to What She SAW-that is Not Hearsay if the Person She Saw Nods His Head ...

in agreement-for example

[FBaggins]

16. She was in the car??

I didn’t see that part of the testimony, but it doesn’t fit the story as I understand it.

[kcr]

23. The driver was sitting there in the same room

when she heard this and did not deny it.

[FBaggins]

24. Also hearsay

Once again. The actual witness isn’t dead.

Other reporting here says that the driver was interviewed by the committee and that he’s willling to testify under oath now. No court would allow her to relate this story when she wasn’t in the car.

[kcr]

25. Good thing this wasn't a court of law then

You are quite simply wrong.

[FBaggins]

27. The DOJ does their work in court

So it’s certainly relevant if we hope that Garland can do something with the testimony.

[kcr]

28. Unless you're asserting

that they can't or won't depose the SS agent, you're full of right-wing talking point spewing air.

[Stallion]

26. Under the Federal Rules of Evidence - "regardless of whether the declarant is available....

Rule 803. Exceptions to the Rule Against Hearsay
Primary tabs
The following are not excluded by the rule against hearsay, regardless of whether the declarant is available as a witness:

(1) Present Sense Impression. A statement describing or explaining an event or condition, made while or immediately after the declarant perceived it.

(2) Excited Utterance. A statement relating to a startling event or condition, made while the declarant was under the stress of excitement that it caused.

(3) Then-Existing Mental, Emotional, or Physical Condition. A statement of the declarant’s then-existing state of mind (such as motive, intent, or plan) or emotional, sensory, or physical condition (such as mental feeling, pain, or bodily health), but not including a statement of memory or belief to prove the fact remembered or believed unless it relates to the validity or terms of the declarant’s will.
*
*
*

so on and so forth-there are over 20 exceptions to the Hearsay Rulre

[FBaggins]

29. There are lots of exceptions to the hearsay rule

Got one that actually applies here?

[Stallion]

31. Yes as I said Above Nonverbal Conduct can Be a Statement under Federal Rule of Evidence 801

Rule 801. Definitions That Apply to This Article; Exclusions from Hearsay

The following definitions apply under this article:

(a) Statement. “Statement” means a person’s oral assertion, written assertion, or nonverbal conduct, if the person intended it as an assertion.

[FBaggins]

32. How could that apply?

She didn’t see any nonverbal behavior in the SUV because she wasn’t there…

One could claim that body language from an actual witness (the witness who was in the room when she heard the story from another witness and didn’t reject it) could qualify… except that the statement he didn’t respond to is itself hearsay.

And I think the section you’re quoting is saying that the nonverbal can still be hearsay. She’s relaying one declarant’s story and a second declarant’s nonverbal agreement. Both would likely be tossed

[sl8]

39. The driver was in the room? Or Engle? nt

[Ms. Toad]

19. Communicative gestures (head nodding)

and even silence in response to an assertion one would have been expected to deny can be hearsay. It is not limited to verbal communication.

The key is that the statement or act was intended to be communicative.

[MiniMe]

22. Mr Ornato told her the story

She wasn't in that Limo, she didn't see it

[sl8]

34. I thought the conversation took place took place in front of Engle?

Engle and the driver both being present in the car.

[Ocelot II]

35. It did.

[Ohio Joe]

4. I see it as a right wing talking point...

To distract from the meat of what was said.

Edit - Not you KOAD... The idea that she is lying or some such is the right wing talking point.

[Kingofalldems]

6. And it's right here on DU.

[emulatorloo]

18. Indeed it is n/t

[Effete Snob]

33. Yep

From a poster I would not have expected

[Twoflower]

8. Yep me too.

[Cha]

12. Exactly.. lMF!

Save Our Democracy💙 in 2022 & 2024!

[Effete Snob]

38. Check this out

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=16865894

[Cha]

40. omg.. Sorry to say..

I'm not surprised. smh

Thanks for standing up for Cassie Hutchenson

Save Our Democracy💙 in 2022 & 2024!

[Kingofalldems]

17. True.

This is all they have.

[Cha]

9. Mahalo KofALLDems!

Save Our Democracy💙 in 2022 & 2024!

[cilla4progress]

11. A hearsay exception is

Statements that are not offered for the truth of the matter (e.g., only offered to show the effect on the listener or to corroborate the witness’s testimony) are not hearsay, and therefore are not excluded under Rules 801 and 802.

Kinda generic

[Ms. Toad]

21. Yes - but there is a heck of a lot of law interpreting the key words in that rule.

As noted above, for example, a statement can include a head not intended to be communicative as long as it satisfies the rest of the definition.