A subsequent remedial measure is not barred by the rule limiting admissibility of subsequent remedial measures if the subsequent remedial measure is offered to impeach a witness or to show any matter (such as ownership, control, or feasibility of precautionary measures) other than negligence, culpable conduct, a defect in a product, a defect in a product's design, or a need for a warning or instruction; but a subsequent remedial measure may be used to show feasibility of precautionary measures only if feasibility has been controverted.

Fed. R. Evid. 404(a)(2) ("evidence of a character trait of peacefulness of the alleged victim offered by the prosecution" is admissible "in a homicide case to rebut evidence that the alleged victim was the first aggressor").In a a criminal trial for homicide, the prosecution may offer the peaceable character of victim to rebut accused's claim that victim was the aggressor.

Fed. R. Evid. 608(b) ("Specific instances of the conduct of a witness, for the purpose of attacking or supporting the witness' character for truthfulness, other than conviction of....In the absence of a conviction against a witness, it is generally impermissible to impeach the witness with extrinisic evidence of an act of the witness if the sole purpose of offering the other is to attack the truthfulness of the witness. Evidence is of an act is "extrinsic" if evidence of the impeaching act can be had only by having another witness give evidence of the impeaching act.

Cf. Loughan v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., 749 F.2d 1519, 1523-1524 (11th Cir. 1985) (action by an injured repairman for negligence and strict liability when a wheel assembly being repaired separated with explosive force; judgment in favor of the manufacturer; plaintiff argued that the district...The admissibility of habit does not depend on the presence or absence of eyewitnesses.