Under the guise of being required under TRE 106, the 2nd Court of Appeals has ruled that a letter a defendant writes in response to a letter he received (concerning his operation of gambling devices) must be admitted into evidence. The defendant's letter consisted of nothing other than his self-serving hearsay declarations. Was it really necessary to have these considered out of "fairness"? Is the fairness standard under 106 entirely distinct from 403 and the trustworthiness concerns raised in 802? If Elmore, No. 02-01-528-CR (08/21/03) is an accurate interpretation of the rule, I guess you have to be a lot more careful in deciding what to offer in the first place because the fairness standard is pretty nebulous.