When is a testimony admissible for substantive evidence in later trials?

Testimony is admissible for substantive evidence in later trials when it has been presented during the initial trial. This principle is rooted in the idea that testimony given in a previous trial can be used as evidence in subsequent trials, provided that it satisfies certain conditions, such as being part of a record and subject to cross-examination.

In the context of the law, if a witness provided testimony in a prior proceeding and that testimony was part of the official record, it can be used in later trials if the witness is unavailable or if the original trial was focused on similar issues. This is often tied to the rules governing hearsay and exceptions that allow for former testimony to be admitted if specific criteria are met.

The other considerations, such as being recorded or verified by third parties, do not independently determine admissibility. While recorded testimony can aid in demonstrating what was said, the mere act of recording does not inherently guarantee its admissibility as substantive evidence in subsequent trials. Similarly, discussion by the jury does not affect the evidence's admissibility; rather, it pertains to the deliberation process following the introduction of evidence during the trial itself.