25 feet____ At 8:30 p.m., it was very dark, and Mr. Hernandez could clearly see the lights of the marina, but because there were no markings on the trail, and no railing along the cliff, he was unable to see that the trail curved, and stepped off the edge of the cliff. Hernandez deviated from this account at trial by testifying that there was no trail and that he stepped off the edge of a retaining wall, not a cliff. The state accordingly used the notice of claim to impeach Hernandez’s new version of the events. ¶ 9 Evidence impeaching a witness’s credibility is always relevant. See State v. McCall, 139 Ariz. 147, 158, 677 P.2d 920, 931 (1983). Prior inconsistent statements are admissible for this purpose. See State v. Saenz, 88 Ariz. 154, 156-57, 353 P.2d 1026, 1028-29 (1960) (<HOLDING>); Parkinson v. Farmers Ins. Co., 122 Ariz. 343,
holding that police officers testimony as to the victims prior inconsistent statements made to him on day of the alleged crime were not admissible as substantive evidence and could not be used to support a finding of guilt holding that a police officers notes were relevant as prior and possibly inconsistent statements made and recorded by the witness holding that an fbi agents notes were not a witness statement within the act because there was no evidence that the witness adopted or approved what was recorded holding that denying admission of police officers typewritten notes of witnesss statement was proper where witness never adopted statements as true and accurate holding that a witness could testify about statements made to him by a police department investigator because the statements were an admission by partyopponent and were thus not excluded by the hearsay rule