1. “A, who witnessed an act of dangerous driving, some weeks later said

to B that the car in question was blue and at the same time made a

written note to the same effect. B reported to C what A had said to

him. If A is subsequently called as a witness in proceedings concerned

with the incident in question, he may of course make a statement from

the witness box in the course of giving his evidence to the effect that

the colour of the car he saw was blue. Evidence may not be given,

however, by A,B, or C of the oral statement made by A out of court.

Likewise, the written statement made by A is inadmissible. if A were to

give evidence that the car in question was blue, and it were suggested

to him in cross-examination that his evidence had been recently

fabricated, his former out-of-court statements would be admissible, but

not as evidence that the car was in fact blue. If A were to give

evidence that the car in question was red, and under crossexamination about his previous out-of-court statements were to deny

having made them, they could be proved against him, again not as

evidence that the car was in fact blue.

Discuss the above excerpt in light of the rule of hearsay and the

exceptions thereto.