Subject to limitations, a witness may be impeached by a prior inconsistent statement.

Fed. R. Evid. 803(3) ("A statement of the declarant's then existing state of mind, emotion, sensation, or physical condition (such as intent, plan, motive, design, mental feeling, pain, and bodily health), but not including a statement of memory or belief to prove the fact remembered or believed unless it relates to the execution,...Federal Rule of Evidence 803(3) or a comparable State rule creates a hearsay exception for a statement by a declarant setting forth the declarant's perception of the declarant's internal state (including mental states, bodily conditions, feelings, motives, designs, and intentions) at the time the declarant makes the statement.

Forrest v. Beloit Corp., 424 F.3d 344, 356 (3d Cir. 2005) (personal injury resulting from accident at paper mill; "There is little doubt that as a general matter evidence concerning the absence of prior accidents can satisfy the relevance threshold established by Rule 402. Courts have indicated that such...To be admissible, the absence of other similar events or accidents must be relevant and not unduly prejudicial

United States v. Arroyo, 406 F.3d 881, 887-888 (7th Cir. 2005) (upholding trial court's exclusion of the statements in the memo prepared by the IRS agent because they were offered for their truth, thus the memo contained hearsay).Hearsay is a statement that (i) is made other than at the trial or proceeding at which it is offered and (ii) is offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted by the maker of the statement, the declarant.