A criminal defendant's other crimes, wrongs, or acts are inadmissible to show the defendant's propensity, or character, for the purpose of showing that the defendant committed the crime for which he or she is on trial.

Fed. R. Evid. 807 ("A statement not specifically covered by Rule 803 or 804 but having equivalent circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness, is not excluded by the hearsay rule, if the court determines that (A) the statement is offered as evidence of a material fact; (B) the statement is more probative on the point for which it is...A statement not specifically covered by Federal Rule of Evidence 803 or 804 or by comparable State rules, but having equivalent circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness, is not excluded by the hearsay rule, if the court determines that (A) the statement is offered as evidence of a material fact; (B) the statement is more probative on the point for which it is offered than any other evidence which the proponent can procure through reasonable efforts; and (C) the general purposes of these rules and the interests of justice will best be served by admission of the statement into evidence.

Olden v. Kentucky, 488 U.S. 227, pin? (1988).Although the Sixth Amendment right of confrontation is a constraint on the admissibility of inculpatory evidence against a defendant at a criminal trial, the Confrontation Right also guarantees a criminal defendant some means for confronting, challenging, and cross-examining witnesses who testify against him and her. The Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause confers on a criminal defendant the right to elicit from an important adverse witness facts -- particularly facts that suggest bias and interest -- that are likely to be significantly probative of the credibility of the testimony of the adverse witness about material facts in issue.

Agushi v. Duerr, 196 F.3d 754, 760 (7th Cir. 1999) (holding that Rule 404(b) does not apply to third party acts).The prohibition against circumstantial character evidence applies to non-parties.