The Incomplete Impeachment Conundrum

One of the most well-known and effective ways of impeaching witnesses is to confront them with a prior statement that is inconsistent with their trial testimony. However, practitioners must be wary of engaging in incomplete impeachment, which occurs when: 1) a party asks a witness about an alleged prior inconsistent statement; 2) the witness denies making the statement; and 3) the party fails to prove up the impeachment by introducing evidence that the statement was in fact made.

As Arlo Walsman explains in his September Illinois Bar Journal article, “The Incomplete Impeachment Conundrum,” this is because a long line of Illinois cases holds that it can be reversible error for a trial court to allow incomplete impeachment. In his article, Walsman examines the existing law surrounding incomplete impeachment and provides practical tips for lawyers to consider when confronting witnesses with their prior inconsistent statements. Knowing this law, he says, will help attorneys prevent favorable judgments from being reversed on appeal.

Read the article The Incomplete Impeachment Conundrum in the September issue of the Illinois Bar Journal.