Evidence law

Judge: “Am I not to hear the truth?” Objecting Counsel: “No, Your Lordship is to hear the evidence. ” Evidence law is a mixture of principles, rules, guidelines and discretions. Jeremy Bentham legal theorist, stated it thus; ‘The field of evidence is no other than the field of knowledge’. The law of evidence is a critical subject for any lawyer or indeed party to a proceedings, who is concerned with investigation or the conduct of trials. The law of evidence is essentially about, the facts or materials that, are admissible to prove something that is in dispute. The John Figgis exercise took a theoretically erudite, but real-world look at how facts that, may establish evidence are employed to substantiate certain results in a law settings.…

the interrogation was done can also be a challenge to the evidence law on handling the terrorism. As mentioned above, the terrorist suspect usually will become stubborn and tough as they might be trained to be so. They will not even give up their information easily. There are trained authorities that specializes in digging out information from the suspects. However, as much as the police are trained to do so, they are also well-trained to endure the interrogation. In the situation such as the…

admissibility of evidence are that it must be relevant, contain a probative value, and must be free of prejudicial bias. The evidence is relevant if it has the propensity to make a fact more or less credible than it would be without the evidence, and the facts of consequence in determining the action. The probative value depends on satisfying the basic requirement of relevancy as described above, but also upon the existence of any matter of fact. For example, if evidence of a spoken statement is…

knowledge of the subject, as well as practical experience and training in the subject. While there is no absolute law as to the extent of the amount of knowledge and experience is needed to qualify as an expert witness, it is encouraged that at a minimum he or she is able to put their knowledge and training together to form an opinion of absolute certainty. A voir dire examination, a reviewing process meaning “to speak the truth”, is conducted as well. The voir dire examination is based upon…

Assignment 5.3: Role of Investigator Introduction Investigators have an immense role in the criminal justice system. They have to ensure they follow due process, as well as, keeping the integrity of the evidence to prove continuity when entered into court. In the QB trial video, R v. Perry and Manitoba (2016), the investigating officer, Constable York, seized four exhibits: a wallet, a Timex watch, a kitchen knife, and a gun replica, which entered into court as physical evidence. Constable…

Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. The plaintiffs of this case claimed that their babies suffered limb reduction birth defects because of Bendectin, a drug prescribed for morning sickness, manufactured by Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. The plaintiffs introduced expert testimony at trial that had not been published, and the research had only been established after the litigation began (Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.) From here, the Daubert test emerged, which states that trial…

CROSS-EXAMINATION EXPERIENCE OF CHILD WITNESSES Zajac, Irvine, Ingram and Jack indicated that cross-examination coerced child witnesses into indiscriminately changing their initial correct and incorrect responses. Their empirical evidence also suggested that cross-examination questioning is detrimental to the accuracy of child witnesses, and children with low assertiveness and low self-confidence are more adversely affected through being challenged about their credibility by cross-examiners.…

child abduction that results in homicide will be explained. In addition to that, the methods for collecting evidence as well as the main investigation techniques that would be used to investigate the murder in this case will be outlined. Keywords: Child, abduction, investigation, murder, kidnapping…

Out of the three sets of expert testimony admissibility standards: The Frye Standard, Rule 702, and the Daubert Standard, the last standard is the best option for Florida. Three main reasons why the Daubert Standard is the better option is: 1) It increases the reliability of evidence by examining factors such as error rate, alternative explanations, and peer reviews 2) It has more checks and balances than the Frye Standard’s criteria of just general acceptance. 3) It is more likely to filter out…

The information gathered during the time they were married is still considered privileged and cannot be used. However, any communication after the divorce is finalized can be used. The purpose behind the husband-wife privilege is to ensure either party does not damage the marital relationship. The physician-patient privilege first went into law in New York in 1828. The physician-client privilege is similar to the attorney-client privilege. Meaning, the physician cannot provide complete care…