Which of the following restrictions is NOT imposed by the Maine Rules of Evidence?

The assertion that hearsay is generally admissible is correct because, under the Maine Rules of Evidence, hearsay is primarily inadmissible unless it falls under certain exceptions. This means that while there are specific situations where hearsay can be considered valid, the general rule is that it cannot be admitted as evidence in court proceedings. This reflects a foundational principle in evidence law aiming to ensure that reliable and verifiable information is presented during trials.

The other options describe restrictions commonly imposed by the Maine Rules of Evidence. For example, exculpatory evidence, which can prove a defendant's innocence, is not inherently inadmissible—it may be used in court under appropriate circumstances. Witness competency is a requirement, meaning witnesses must have the ability to understand and recount their experiences or opinions pertinent to the case. Additionally, evidentiary privileges, which protect certain communications from being disclosed in court, do apply to specific relationships, such as attorney-client or doctor-patient.

Thus, the incorrect nature of the statement regarding hearsay aligns with the established legal framework that governs evidence in Maine, making the analysis of the rules crucial for legal practitioners in understanding what can be presented in court.