Federal Rule of Evidence of Evidence 804(b)(3) or a comparable State rule creates a hearsay exception for a statement which was at the time of its making so far contrary to the declarant's pecuniary or proprietary interest, or so far tended to subject the declarant to civil or criminal liability, or to render invalid a claim by the declarant against another, that a reasonable person in the declarant's position would not have made the statement unless believing it to be true. A statement tending to expose the declarant to criminal liability and offered to exculpate the accused is not admissible unless corroborating circumstances clearly indicate the trustworthiness of the statement.

United States v. Hewitt, 634 F.2d 277, 278 (5th Cir. 1981) (conviction for three counts of unlawful possession or receipt of firearms; court reversed and remanded for a new trial, after finding that accused was erroneously denied the opportunity to present evidence of his general character as a...A criminal defendant may offer a pertinent trait of his or her character circumstantially -- to show the defendant's doing or non-doing of a specific act.

United States v. Wenger, 427 F.3d 840, 855 (10th Cir. 2005) (upholding trial court's admission into evidence of accused's prior SEC violation where (1) such evidence "was introduced for the purpose of rebutting [accused's] defense of good faith reliance;" (2) the evidence "was relevant to the question of...Evidence of a criminal or wrongful act apart from the act that at issue at trial Is not barred by the prohibition against circumstantial use of character if intent, knowledge, mistake, or accident is a legally-material factual issue, the opposing party suggests the non-existence of knowledge or urges mistake or accident as a defense, and evidence of another crime, wrong, or act is offered to prove the knowledge or the absence of mistake or accident by a criminal defendant or other person.

Gallagher v. Delaney, 139 F.3d 338, 346 (2d Cir. 1998) (reversing summary judgment in a civil action for discrimination due to sexual harassment and retaliation where the trial judge characterized plaintiff as a married woman "carrying on a full-fledged office romance with [another]...Rape shield laws frequently make it impermissible -- sometimes in trials of civil actions as well as in criminal trials -- to introduce evidence either to show that an alleged victim of sexual wrongdoing engaged in other sexual behavior or to show the alleged victim's sexual predisposition.