Which of the following is NOT a criterion for First Hand Hearsay?

The correct choice indicates that "NOT a criterion for First Hand Hearsay" is a key distinction in understanding what constitutes First Hand Hearsay. First Hand Hearsay refers to information that a witness directly observed and can describe from their own experiences, without the inclusion of intermediary interpretations or accounts from others.

When considering the other criteria, the claim that it comes from eyewitnesses aligns perfectly with the definition of First Hand Hearsay; it involves accounts by those who directly witnessed the events in question. Furthermore, the information being directly related to the case is essential, as it ensures that the hearsay is pertinent to the issues being evaluated.

The requirement that the information must be recorded contemporaneously is also significant because it helps to establish reliability and credibility by ensuring that the account is captured close to the time of the event, minimizing the risk of memory decay or distortion.

In contrast, the inclusion of secondhand accounts stands outside the framework of First Hand Hearsay. Such accounts do not arise from direct observation and therefore cannot be classified as First Hand Hearsay. This fundamentally highlights why that option is the correct choice in identifying what does not fit the criteria for First Hand Hearsay.