hearsay upon hearsay objectionable
 Defendant also alleged that the trial court erred in excluding an official police record
of an incident involving plaintiff subsequent to the accident. It contends that the police
record was admissible as an official business record for the purpose of impeaching the
witness. Plaintiff objected to the admission of the report on the grounds that it contained
hearsay upon hearsay because it contained statements of a third party recorded by a
police officer, and because the witness offered by the defendant to identify the report
had no personal knowledge of the contents of the report.
 Plaintiff's objection was properly sustained. Police reports of this nature do not fall
within the "business records exception" to the hearsay rule. See 2 B. Jones, The Law of
Evidence § 12:14 (6th ed. S. Gard). Furthermore, where such reports contain hearsay,
they are not admissible. Michael v. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Co., 138 Colo.
450, 334 P.2d 1090. See Meader v. People, 178 Colo. 383, 497 P.2d 1010; Kurtz v.
People, 177 Colo. 306, 494 P.2d 97; Orth v. Bauer, 163 Colo. 136, 429 P.2d 279.
PHONE #s: 970-330-3883/720-203-5142 c.
For mailing: Excellence Unlimited, 2830 27th St. Ln. #B115, Greeley , CO 80634
BEAR'S WEB PAGES: