In a prosecution of Drew for forgery, the defense objects to the testimony of West, a government expert, on the ground of inadequate qualifications. The government seeks to introduce a letter from the expert's former criminology professor, stating that West is generally acknowledged in his field as well qualified. On the issue of the expert's qualifications, the letter may be considered by 
the jury, without regard to the hearsay rule.  the judge, without regard to the hearsay rule.  neither the judge nor the jury, because it (C) neither the judge nor the jury, because it is hearsay not within any exception.  both the judge and the jury, because the letter is not offered for a hearsay purpose. 
Question: In a prosecution of Drew for forgery, the defense objects to the testimony of West, a government expert, on the ground of inadequate qualifications. The government seeks to introduce a letter from the expert's former criminology professor, stating that West is generally acknowledged in his field as well qualified. On the issue of the expert's qualifications, the letter may be considered by 
A. the jury, without regard to the hearsay rule. 
B. the judge, without regard to the hearsay rule. 
C. neither the judge nor the jury, because it (C) neither the judge nor the jury, because it is hearsay not within any exception. 
D. both the judge and the jury, because the letter is not offered for a hearsay purpose. 
Answer: