as recently fabricated or the witness must have a motive for testifying falsely. (See People v. Emerson (1983), 97 Ill. 2d 487, 501.) Obviously, the motive for defendant to testify that his statements were coerced existed prior to and when he made the writings. Defendant also asserts that the writings were also admissible under the curative admissibility or the completeness doctrines. The curative admissibility doctrine was not invoked at trial by defendant and, further, is irrelevant to the issue here. See 1 J. Wigmore, Evidence §15, at 731 (1983) (prior introduction of inadmissible evidence estops subsequent objection to other inadmissible evidence offered by opposing party); Chicago City Ry. Co. v. Bunding (1904), 210 Ill. 39; People v. Higgins (1979), 71 Ill. App. 3d 912, 931 (<HOLDING>). The completeness doctrine permits an opposing
holding that a party who fails to introduce evidence of the specific value of the marital residence is estopped from appealing the distribution based on that absence of evidence holding that new evidence must be evidence that is not merely cumulative holding that the rules of evidence normally applicable in criminal trials do not operate with full force at hearings before the judge to determine the admissibility of evidence there is therefore much to be said for the proposition that in proceedings where the judge himself is considering the admissibility of evidence the exclusionary rules aside from rules of privilege should not be applicable and the judge should receive the evidence and give it such weight as his judgment and experience counsel holding curative admissibility doctrine is not intended to operate so as to permit a party to introduce irrelevant evidence merely because his opponent brought out some evidence on the same subject but is limited to situations where necessary to eradicate undue prejudicial inference which might otherwise ensue from the introduction of the original evidence holding that new evidence is evidence not previously of record and not merely cumulative of other evidence