A chart, diagram, visual aid, or the like is not evidence.

Cf. United States v. Jones, 299 F.3d 103, 112-113 (2d Cir. 2002) (upholding trial court's admission of the testimony of Officer Moreland because "Chin's requirement that the [trial] court consider 'the....The right of confrontation guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States bars the introduction against a criminal defendant of testimonial hearsay by a nontestifying declarant unless (i) the absent declarant is unavailable to testify at trial and (ii) the defendant had an adequate opportunity to cross-examine the absent declarant prior to trial.

United States v. McLee, 436 F.3d 751, 759-760 (7th Cir. 2006) (upholding trial court'a admission of witness's testimony about the conspiracy because it completed the story on the "genesis" of the conspiracy and "nature" of the relationship between the accused and the witness).Other crimes, wrongs, or acts are admissible and do not violate the prohibition against the use of character to show conduct if such acts are admissible to show the context of an event at issue at trial or to tell the full story or an intelligible story of a series of events at issue at trial.

Leonard v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 499 F.3d 419, 442 (5th Cir. 2007) (holding that the district court erroneously admitted statements made by insurer's agent to policyholders as "habit" evidence under Federal Rule of Evidence 406 because "evidence was lacking to suggest that [insurer agent's] statements...A course of conduct can constitute habit for purposes of Federal Rule of Evidence 406 and state counterparts to Rule 406 only if the conduct is highly regular or practically invariable.