Evidence of a criminal or wrongful act apart from the act that at issue at trial Is not barred by the prohibition against circumstantial use of character if intent, knowledge, mistake, or accident is a legally-material factual issue, the opposing party suggests the non-existence of knowledge or urges mistake or accident as a defense, and evidence of another crime, wrong, or act is offered to prove the knowledge or the absence of mistake or accident by a criminal defendant or other person.

United States v. Carson, 455 F.3d 336, 379-380 (D.C. Cir. 2006) (upholding trial court's refusal to admit the grand jury testimony of unavailable witnesses because "[defendants had] failed to show how the motive to develop....The hearsay exception for prior testimony applies in a criminal case only if the if the party against whom the testimony is now offered had an opportunity and similar motive to develop the testimony in the prior proceeding by direct, cross, or redirect examination. The exception applies in a civil action or proceeding only if the party against whom the testimony is now offered or a predecessor in interest had an opportunity and similar motive in the prior proceeding to develop the testimony by direct, cross, or redirect examination.

Fed. R. Evid. 610 ("Evidence of the beliefs or opinions of a witness on matters of religion is not admissible for the purpose of showing that by reason of their nature the witness' credibility is impaired or enhanced.").Neither religious belief nor the absence of religious belief is admissible to rehabilitate a witness.

United States v. Avants, 367 F.3d 433, 444-445 (5th Cir. 2004) (upholding trial court's admission of the 1966 preliminary hearing testimony through Rule 804(b)(1) because the "Rule require[d] that....If the declarant is unavailable, Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b)(1) or a comparable State rule creates a hearsay exception for testimony given as a witness at another hearing of the same or a different proceeding, or in a deposition taken in compliance with law in the course of the same or another proceeding, if the party against whom the testimony is now offered, or, in a civil action or proceeding, a predecessor in interest, had an opportunity and similar motive to develop the testimony by direct, cross, or redirect examination.