The Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination confers on a criminal defendant the right to give relevant testimony.

Fed. R. Evid. 608(b) advisory committee's note ("By limiting the application of the Rule to proof of a witness? character for truthfulness, the (2003) amendment leaves the admissibility of extrinsic evidence offered for other grounds of impeachment (such as contradiction, prior inconsistent statement, bias and mental capacity) to Rules 402...Extrinsic evidence of prior inconsistent statements is not barred by the partial federal codification in Federal Rule of Evidence 608(b) of the common law collateral matter rule.

Parton v. Wyrick, 766 F.2d 336, 336 (8th Cir. 1985) (Section 1983 action by prison inmate against prison officials for personal injuries sustained as a result of a beating; issue: admissibility of testimony of a prison volunteer about conversation she overheard between prison inmate and his spouse;...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. Thunder Horse, 370 F.3d 745, 748 (8th Cir. 2004) (upholding trial court's admission into evidence of the testimony of forensics interviewer Hawkins under the residual hearsay exception because of the presence....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.