At Al Capone's trial for extortion, the prosecutor called a witness expecting her to testify that she had heard Capone threaten a man with physical harm unless the man made payoffs to Capone. The witness denied ever having heard the defendant make such threats, even though she had testified to that effect before the grand jury. The prosecutor now seeks to admit the witness's grand jury testimony. How should the court rule with regard to the grand jury testimony? Assume for purposes of this question that the prior testimony would pass all hearsay hurdles and the 613 procedural requirements have been observed.

Exclude the testimony because it is about a collateral matter.

Admit the testimony, because the witness has direct knowledge.

Admit the testimony, both for impeachment and for substantive use.

Admit the testimony only for impeachment.