1. Prosecution of D for assault and battery on V. V was attacked in a dimly lit alley late one night, with the perpetrator jumping V from behind. A struggle ensued, during which V got a glimpse of the perpetrator. The day after the assault, while V was recuperating in the hospital from serious head injuries, he described his attacker to Police officer, as a white male between 25 and 35, medium height, with long brown hair. Police officer then showed V some photographs of men generally meeting the description V gave. V picked D's photograph out of this group. At trial, V testifies generally about the crime, but is unable to provide much detail because, he claims, he remembers little. V remembers looking through some photographs, but does not remember who, if anybody, he selected. The prosecutor then calls Police officer and wishes to have Police officer testify that V chose D's photograph. D lodges a hearsay objection to Police officer's testimony insofar as it relates that V selected D's photograph. Which of the followings statements is most accurate?
   1. Police officer's testimony concerning V's selection of D's photograph is admissible under the prior identification rule.
   2. Because V remembers so little about both the attack and identification procedure, admitting Police officer's testimony would violate D's right to confront the witnesses against him.
   3. Because Police officer did not know whether V chose the correct person when he selected D's photograph from the book, Police officer's testimony is inadmissible.
   4. Because V could not have gotten a good look at the attacker, V did not have personal knowledge. Thus, V would not have been allowed to testify about who attacked him. If V could not have testified to this fact, neither can Police officer.