Opinion ID: 702362
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Exclusion of Evidence of Witnesses' Religious Beliefs

Text: 37 Finally, the Benedicts argue that the district court erred in excluding evidence of Martina and Chris Benedict's religious beliefs, offered to show that Martina and Chris were biased witnesses. Martina and Chris were both members of Zion's Endeavor, a religious group of which Thien was the pastor. 38 Under Rule 610 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, [e]vidence of the beliefs or opinions of a witness on matters of religion is not admissible for the purpose of showing that by reason of their nature the witness' credibility is impaired or enhanced. However, 39 [w]hile the rule forecloses inquiry into the religious beliefs or opinions of a witness for the purpose of showing that his character for truthfulness is affected by their nature, an inquiry for the purpose of showing interest or bias because of them is not within the prohibition. Thus disclosure of affiliation with a church which is a party to the litigation would be allowable under the rule. 40 Fed.R.Evid. 610 advisory committee's notes. The court admitted testimony that the church consisted of a group of folks who met in [Thien's] basement, about 30 people.... II Trial Tr. at 279. The court further admitted testimony that Chris and Martina were members of the church of which Thien was the pastor, and that Chris worked for a company owned by Thien and was close to Thien. II Trial Tr. at 364-65, 404. This evidence was properly admitted for the purpose of showing that Chris and Martina may have been biased in favor of Thien through their religious affiliation with him. 41 The evidence excluded by the court, however, was not probative of Martina's and Chad's bias in favor of Thien. All of the evidence cited in appellant's brief as improperly excluded under Rule 610 concerns a specific tenet of Zion's Endeavor that participation in civil litigation is in violation of biblical law. The Benedicts proposed to introduce testimony regarding this specific tenet as the reason why Martina and Chris were not parties to the state court wrongful death action brought by the Benedicts, and why Chad delayed in joining that action. Appellant's Br. at 28-30. We fail to see the relevance of this issue to the instant case, and we fail to see how showing that Martina and Chris had religious reasons to decide not to join the wrongful death action shows that they were biased witnesses in the insurance action. The fact that Martina and Chris were members of a small religious group led by Thien, and that met regularly in Thien's basement, was before the jury. This fact is probative of bias, and was admitted. The reasons why Martina and Chris did not join the wrongful death action, and why Chad was late in joining, do not add to a showing of bias, and appear to us to be an attempt to undermine Martina's and Chris's credibility, and to prejudice the jury against them, by painting them as religious extremists. 42 The district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding detailed examination of the nature of Martina and Chris Benedict's religious beliefs.