The reasons of judgment and relevant demonstrations the United States Supreme Court offered to the the Bullcoming v. New Mexico Case showed the current latest position of the Supreme Court to the affirmation means and domain of application of “testimony statements”. Specifically, the “testimony statements” made by the outcourt narrator to the governmental official belong to “testimony hearsay evidence” and should be bound by the right of confrontation but not by the regulation of hearsay exception while the “testimony statements” made by the outcourt narrator to the nongovernmental official belong to “nontestimony hearsay evidence” and should be bound by the regulation of hearsay exception but not by the right of confrontation. However, the Supreme Court differs seriously in the domain of application of the right of confrontation and regulation of hearsay exception, which evidently shows its tendency of value balance on the issue.

a history of the United States; the United States Law of Evidence; the right of confrontation; hearsay regulation; evident credibility; testimony statement; value balance