PRIOR STATEMENTS OF WITNESSES
Subject to the provisions of S.C. Code Ann. §§ 19-1-80, 19-1-90 and 19-1-100:
(a) Examining Witness Concerning Prior Statement. In examining a witness concerning a prior statement made by the witness, whether written or not, the statement need not be shown nor its contents disclosed to the witness at that time, but on request the same shall be shown or disclosed to opposing counsel.
(b) Extrinsic Evidence of Prior Inconsistent Statement of Witness. Extrinsic evidence of a prior inconsistent statement by a witness is not admissible unless the witness is advised of the substance of the statement, the time and place it was allegedly made, and the person to whom it was made, and is given the opportunity to explain or deny the statement. If a witness does not admit that he has made the prior inconsistent statement, extrinsic evidence of such statement is admissible. However, if a witness admits making the prior statement, extrinsic evidence that the prior statement was made is inadmissible. This provision does not apply to admissions of a party-opponent as defined in Rule 801(d)(2).
The language at the beginning of this rule was added to provide that the rule is subject to the provisions of S.C. Code Ann. §§ 19-1-80 to -100 (1985) regarding written statements made to public employees.
Subsection (a) is identical to the federal rule. This provision was included in the federal rule to abolish the holding in The Queen's Case, 2 Br. & B. 284, 129 Eng. Rep. 976 (1820), that a witness must be shown a prior statement before being examined about the statement. Although no South Carolina case has been found adopting the holding in The Queen's Case, the language of the federal rule eliminating the requirement of showing the witness the prior statement has been included in the South Carolina rule.
Subsection (b) of the federal rule was amended to provide that a proper foundation must be laid before admitting a prior inconsistent statement. A witness must be permitted to admit, deny, or explain a prior inconsistent statement. McMillan v. Ridges, 229 S.C. 76, 91 S.E.2d 883 (1956). Extrinsic evidence of the statement is not admissible unless the witness is advised of the substance of the statement, the time and place it was allegedly made, and the person to whom it was made. State v. Galloway, 263 S.C. 585, 211 S.E.2d 885 (1975). In addition, language was added to subsection (b) to set forth the rule that if the witness admits making the prior statement, the witness has been impeached and no further extrinsic evidence of the statement, including the statement itself, is admissible. State v. Lynn, 277 S.C. 222, 284 S.E.2d 786 (1981); McMillan v. Ridges, supra.