Evidence that helps tell a factual story in an intelligible way or that puts the evidence or the issues in the case in a meaningful or intelligible context is "relevant."

Cf. United States v. Baker, 538 F.3d 324, 331 (5th Cir. 2008) (vacating conviction for distributing child pornography because the trial court erroneously admitted NCMEC report [consisting of 46 images provided to law....The hearsay exception for "business records" created by Federal Rule of Evidence 803(6) or a comparable State rule applies only (i) the record is based on the personal knowledge of an entrant with a business duty to record the event or other such matter or (ii) if the record of the event is based on the personal knowledge of a person who had a business duty to transmit the information about the event or other matter to the person or persons who made the record and had a business duty to do so. A person has a "business duty" if the person has a duty to an organization by reason of law, contract, employment relationship, or other such matter to record or report an event, condition, opinion, or other matter to which the business records exception to the hearsay rule may apply.

Pan American World Airways, Inc. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., 368 F. Supp. 1098, 1104 n.5 (S.D.N.Y. 1973) (holding, in plaintiff airline company's action against defendant insurance carriers for insurance liability, that "reputation is acceptable as proof of....There is a hearsay exception for reputation in a community, arising before the controversy, as to boundaries of or customs affecting lands in the community, and reputation as to events of general history important to the community or State or nation in which located.

Cf. United States v. Tafollo-Cardenas, 897 F.2d 976, 980 (9th Cir. 1990) (reversing convictions for conspiracy to import heroin and possession with intent to distribute heroin because the trial court erroneously admitted Contreras'....A prior inconsistent statement of a witness is admissible, not only to impeach the witness, but also as substantive evidence -- to prove the truth of the matter previously asserted by the witness -- only if the prior consistent statement was made in another proceeding.