If a criminal defendant offers evidence of his or her character circumstantially - to show he or she did not commit the crime charged -- the prosecution can offer rebutting evidence of defendant's character.

Giles v. California, 128 S. Ct. 2678, pin? (2008) (a criminal defendant who wrongly causes a witness to be unavailable can forfeit his or her constitutional right of confrontation but only if the defendant's wrongful action was done for the purpose of making the witness...A defendant can forfeit the right of confrontation guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment to defendants in both federal and state trials. Such forfeiture can occur if a defendant takes an action that prevents a witness from appearing and testifying at the defendant's trial.

Brazos River Authority v. GE Ionics, Inc., 469 F.3d 416, 426 (5th Cir. 2006) ("Although Ionics urges that the district court properly excluded evidence of other fires because the circumstances of the BRA fires were unique, the law in this circuit with respect to cases, such as this case or Davidson, that...To be admissible, prior events or accidents must be substantially similar to those at issue in trial.

United States v. Perry, 438 F.3d 642, 648 (6th Cir. 2006) (upholding trial court's admission of the Bank One robbery evidence because the NCB and Bank One robberies had sufficient distinctive similarity which created a pattern or modus operandi).If another crime or wrong is offered under the second sentence of Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) to show the identity of an actor, wrongdoer, or defendant (e.g., to show that a criminal defendant rather than someone else committed the crime for which defendant is on trial), the other crime or wrong and the act, wrong, or crime at issue at trial must have been committed in a distinctive as well as similar fashion.