People v. Armstrong

Witnesses' prior inconsistent statements to detective, implicating Defendant, were substantive evidence, and there was some corroborative evidence to support Defendant's conviction for first degree murder. Evidence was sufficient to prove Defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The jury chose to believe the State's evidence, which included prior inconsistent statements of witnesses. Pretrial statement of one witness was videotaped, and jury could thereby see witness' demeanor and compare it to his demeanor at trial. (WRIGHT and McDADE, concurring.)