Court Opinion

ID: 9526362
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 03:16:07.614721+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:19:30.923447
License: Public Domain

SHARPNACK, Chief Judge,
concurring.
I concur and note that the prior statements made by the victim and admitted by the trial court were each made after the incident which may have been a motivation for fabrication. If the account given by the victim was a fabrication, the fact that she gave it to others prior to trial would not tend to prove that it was not a fabrication. See e.g., United States v. Davis (7th Cir.1989), 890 F.2d 1373, 1379; but see, e.g., United States v. Hamilton (6th Cir.1982), 689 F.2d 1262, 1273.