Volume 1998    Issue 4

The Silence Speaks Volumes: A Brief Reflection on the Question of Whether It Is Necessary or Even Desirable to Fill the Seeming Gaps in Article VI of the Federal Rules of Evidence, Governing the Admissibility of Evidence Logically Relevant to the Witness's Credibility

Edward J. Imwinkelried^*

Article VI of the Federal Rules of Evidence addresses who may be impeached and the methods of impeachment. However, the common law methods of impeachment, such as bias and specific contradiction, are not enumerated in the rules. While some scholars have identified these omissions as gaps that need to be filled, Professor Imwinkelried argues that the rules are designed and work effectively, despite the omissions. By examining the development, purpose, and use of the Federal Rules of Evidence, the impeachment silence may be explained as legislative judgment to shift decision-making power from the appellate to the trial courts. Professor Imwinkelried concludes that there is no need to amend Article VI to fill the "seeming gaps."

* Professor of Law, University of California at Davis; B.A., 1967, University of San Francisco; J.D., 1969, University of San Francisco; former chair, Evidence Section, American Association of Law Schools.