That a conversation dealt with some subject matter rather than another may be a condition that affects the relevance of the conversation for purposes of Federal Rule of Evidence 104(b) or a comparable State rule.

United States v. Peneaux, 432 F.3d 882, 892 (8th Cir. 2005) (upholding trial court's admission of the victim child's prior out-of-court statements pursuant to Rule 807 because "[t]he government provided the requisite....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.

Cf. Hall v. Commissioner, 729 F.2d 632, 634-635 (9th Cir. 1984) (holding that the tax court properly excluded as hearsay the contribution statement because it did not fall under the religious records exception to the....Federal Rule of Evidence 803(11) or a comparable State rule creates a hearsay exception for regularly-kept records of religious organizations showing births, deaths, legitimacy, ancestry, relationship by blood, or other similar personal or family history.

Unied States v. Beasley, 809 F.2d 1273, 1277-1278 (7th Cir. 1987) (holding that evidence of accused's bad acts to prove "pattern of crimes especially close in time" was inadmissible where "many bad acts of which [accused] was [charged] during trial were not similar in the sense...That other wrongs or crimes show a person's pattern of conduct does not by itself make inapplicable either the prohibition in Federal Rule of Evidence 404(a) against the use of character or propensity to show that person's conduct on a particular occasion or the corollary prohibition in Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) against the use of other wrongs or crimes to show character or propensity for the purpose of showing a person's conduct on a particular occasion.