I'm looking for ideas from anyone who has prosecuted someone for a new sex offense based on admissions made to their sex offender therapist, probation officer, or polygrapher.

My Defendant confessed to sexually abusing his step-daughter and received probation. He failed a polygraph about one year into probation and ultimately confessed to the polygrapher that he continued abusing the child after starting probation. (Yes he was allowed to remain in the home.) So he is now charged for this new offense.

Both of his statements were videorecorded and the old one should be admissible under 38.37. The actual polygraph portion of the second statement is easily redacted leaving just his confession.

My question is whether 38.37 is going to let me prove up not just that the prior bad acts occurred but that he received probation for it, and further that he was ordered to do the polygraph which led to his later confession. I'm just finding it difficult to explain the context of this second confession without telling the jury why he is there talking about this stuff in the first place.