I always thought hearsay evidence was inadmissable.
Her testimony, truthful or not, is not hearsay. She was a primary witness, albeit subject to the limits of telephony and the length of the call.
Hearsay doesn't refer to the human ear. What the ear hears is admissible, if the ear was listening to an actual event. Hearsay is second-hand accounts. So and so told me such and such is not admissable, whether by ear or by email, letter or whatever.