Opinion ID: 167809
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Audiotape

Text: M s. Saurini argues that the district court erred by allowing the defendants to play an audiotape of the M ay 16, 2000, School Board meeting after denying her request to admit the tape. She had sought to introduce the 15-minute tape during her direct testimony as evidence of her dismissive treatment by the Board. The defendants objected to the admission of the tape as irrelevant and repetitive. -18- After listening to the tape, the district court sustained the objection, ruling that it was “repetitious and cumulative.” Aplt. App. at 1267. M s. Saurini then testified that the School Board had treated her rudely, saying, “I wish you could hear the sarcasm in their voices,” id. at 1418, and “I cannot express probably enough how rude they were,” id. at 1419. She also stated that the Board had rudely cut off both her and her supporters while speaking. After this testimony, the defendants changed their position and offered to play the tape to refute her testimony that the Board had treated her rudely during the M ay 16 meeting. M s. Saurini objected, saying that if the tape “was cumulative in our case, it’s certainly . . . cumulative in [the] defense case.” Id. at 1563. The district court overruled the objection, saying that “in all fairness it needs to be heard by the jury.” Id. at 1564. The district court’s ruling was sensible. W e see no abuse of discretion.