Peterson sued Dylan for libel. After Peterson testified that Dylan wrote to Peterson's employer that Peterson was a thief, Dylan offers evidence that Peterson once stole money from a former employer. The evidence of Peterson's prior theft is 
admissible, as substantive evidence to prove that Peterson is a thief.  admissible, but only to impeach Peterson's credibility.  inadmissible, because character may not be shown by specific instances of conduct.  inadmissible, because such evidence is more unfairly prejudicial than probative. 
Question: Peterson sued Dylan for libel. After Peterson testified that Dylan wrote to Peterson's employer that Peterson was a thief, Dylan offers evidence that Peterson once stole money from a former employer. The evidence of Peterson's prior theft is 
A. admissible, as substantive evidence to prove that Peterson is a thief. 
B. admissible, but only to impeach Peterson's credibility. 
C. inadmissible, because character may not be shown by specific instances of conduct. 
D. inadmissible, because such evidence is more unfairly prejudicial than probative. 
Answer: