Inferences on inferences are impermissible

United States v. Fletcher, 322 F.3d 508, 517-518 (8th Cir. 2003) (upholding trial court's admission into evidence of the testimony of an attorney [who represented the defendant in prior civil adjudications resulting from his....If a statement is made by a party and the statement is offered against the party that made the statement, the federal law of evidence characterizes such a statement as non-hearsay and exempts it from the hearsay prohibition found in Federal Rule of Evidence 802 or a comparable State rule even though the exempted statement otherwise satisfies the definition of hearsay given in Rule 801(c) or a comparable State rule.

Unied States v. Beasley, 809 F.2d 1273, 1277-1278 (7th Cir. 1987) (holding that evidence of accused's bad acts to prove "pattern of crimes especially close in time" was inadmissible where "many bad acts of which [accused] was [charged] during trial were not similar in the sense...That other wrongs or crimes show a person's pattern of conduct does not by itself make inapplicable either the prohibition in Federal Rule of Evidence 404(a) against the use of character or propensity to show that person's conduct on a particular occasion or the corollary prohibition in Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) against the use of other wrongs or crimes to show character or propensity for the purpose of showing a person's conduct on a particular occasion.

Cf. United States v. Zedner, 401 F.3d 36, 49-50 (2d Cir. 2005) (upholding trial court's admission into evidence of rebuttal witnneses' testimony about accused's previous commission of fraud, where accused claimed lack of criminal intent, and evidence of fraud was relevant to prove accused's...Evidence of another crime, wrong, or act is not barred by the prohibition against circumstantial use of character if such other crime, wrong, or act is offered to prove the existence of a plan or scheme.