Federal Rule of Evidence 409 or a comparable State rule bars evidence that a party paid for or furnished medical, hospital, or similar expenses for an injury if such evidence is offered to show the party's liability for the injury.

Fed. R. Evid. 807 (a "statement not specifically covered by Rule 803 or 804" must have "equivalent circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness" if the statement is to be admissible under Rule 807).A statement is admissible under the hearsay exception created by Federal Rule of Evidence 807 or a comparable State rule only if circumstantial evidence shows that the affected statement is as trustworthy as the statements that are made admissible by the hearsay exceptions created by Federal Rules of Evidence 803 and 804 or by comparable State rules.

Fed. R. Evid. 807(C) (statement admissible under Rule 807 only if "the general purposes of these rules and the interests of justice will best be served").The hearsay exception created by Federal Rule of Evidence 807 or a parallel State rule applies only if admission of the affected statement in evidence serves the interests of justice and the general purposes of the law of evidence.

United States v. Garcia, 897 F.2d 1413, 1420 (7th Cir. 1990) (upholding trial court's admission of defendant's statements as statements against penal interest because (1) "[defendant] Carlos' statements implicating....A statement that exposes a declarant (other than the defendant) to criminal liability is admissible under the hearsay exception for statements against interest to exculpate a criminal defendant only if corroborating circumstances show that the statement is trustworthy.