Opinion ID: 368344
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: The Post-Arrest Conflicting Statements.

Text: 36 Following his arrest, during an interview with a postal inspector, Smith offered several conflicting exculpatory statements. Smith contends that because testimony relating to his inconsistent stories did not serve to controvert prior defense testimony, the district court erred in admitting such testimony into evidence. 37 In United States v. Mitchell, 558 F.2d 1332, 1335 (8th Cir. 1977), we noted that (f)alse exculpatory statements are admissible at trial as tending to indicate guilt(.) Further, the postal inspector's testimony about Smith's statements bears directly on the credibility of an alibi witness for Smith. Consequently, the district court properly admitted such Government testimony. 38