Which statement best describes the admissibility of a witness's character for credibility under Rule 607, 608, and 609?

• A. A witness's character for truthfulness may be attacked only under 608.
• B. Only Rule 609 addresses admissibility of a witness's prior crimes for credibility.
• C. Evidence of a witness's character may be admitted under 607, 608, and 609.
• D. No rules allow admission of a witness's character for credibility.

Answer: (C)

Impeaching a witness’s credibility can be done through multiple avenues, not just one rule. Under the broad rule, any party may attack a witness’s truthfulness, so you’re not limited to a single pathway. That leaves open using Rule 608 to introduce evidence about a witness’s character for truthfulness, either by reputation or by opinion. There’s a caveat, though: Rule 608 generally forbids using extrinsic evidence of specific acts to prove truthfulness; those details must be explored through cross-examination to test credibility. Separate from that, Rule 609 allows evidence of a witness’s prior criminal convictions to impeach credibility, with its own conditions about time since conviction and the nature of the offense. Together, these rules provide multiple, compatible routes for admitting character evidence to attack credibility. Therefore, saying that evidence of a witness’s character for credibility may be admitted under 607, 608, and 609 is correct.