Consider the facts from U.S. v Kaquatosh (E.D. Wis. 2003):

"The prosecution alleges that on December 21, 2001, defendant struck Marvin Wayka on the head with a wooden object, causing Wayka to lose consciousness and sustain an open skull fracture. The government moved in limine for an order that law enforcement officers be permitted, pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 801(d)(1)(C), to testify that two witnesses told them that defendant assaulted Wayka...The government indicated that the officers would testify to statements made by Connie Freeman and Virginia Waupoose regarding the incident alleged in count one of the indictment. On January 7, 2002, Freeman informed one of the officers that on December 31 she observed defendant strike Wayka on the head and face with a piece of wood. Waupoose apparently told a second officer that she observed defendant hit Wayka on the head with a piece of wood.

Neither Freeman nor Waupoose observed defendant in a line-up, show-up, or photo array and then identified him. Rather, they simply advised the officers that they observed defendant assault Wayka."

Assume that both Freeman and Waupoose will testify at the trial. How should the court wule on the government's in limine motion?