- 58 -
rial entries that are the subject of respondent’s evidentiary
objection are the items themselves, i.e., the 25 checks and the
1 money order themselves. See United States v. Carroll, 860 F.2d
500, 506 n.13 (1st Cir. 1988). Certain of respondent’s employees
prepared the material entries that are the subject of respon-
dent’s evidentiary objection by using copies, which respondent
received after having issued summonses to petitioner’s banks, of
microfiche of such checks and money order, which microfiche those
banks maintained. For purposes of FRE 1001 through 1008, those
copies of such microfiche constitute duplicates, and not origi-
nals. See id. at 507.
On the record before us, we find that respondent was never
in control, as required by FRE 1004(3), of the “originals” of the
documents that identify the payors during the years at issue of
the items that relate to the material entries that are the
subject of respondent’s evidentiary objection.16 We further find
on the instant record that petitioner has not satisfactorily
16On the instant record, we also have a question about
whether petitioner satisfies the requirement under FRE 1004(3)
that respondent have been “put on notice” that the contents of
respondent’s workpapers were to be a subject of proof at the
further trial in this case. In this connection, respondent
indicated at the further trial that petitioner did not notify
respondent until Aug. 15, 2000, less than one week before the
further trial in this case began, that petitioner might offer
respondent’s workpapers as exhibits in this case and that respon-
dent did not have an opportunity to determine which entries in
those workpapers are otherwise established by the stipulations
and evidence introduced at the trial and to be introduced at the
further trial and which entries he would object to at the further
trial.
Page: Previous 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011