Relevancy and admissibility скачать в хорошем качестве

Relevancy and admissibility

Relevancy is the logical link between evidence and a fact in issue, making it more or less probable, while admissibility is the legal rule determining if that relevant evidence can actually be presented in court, with rules excluding things like hearsay or privileged info. Key takeaway: All admissible evidence must be relevant, but not all relevant evidence is admissible, as it must also meet legal standards and not fall under specific exclusions. Relevancy Definition: Evidence is relevant if it has any tendency to make a fact in question (fact in issue) more or less probable than it would be without the evidence, says the National Center for Professional Development. Core Principle: It's about logical connection and probative value. Example: A muddy boot print at a crime scene is relevant because it connects a person to the location. Admissibility Definition: Whether a court legally permits relevant evidence to be shown, governed by rules of evidence. Core Principle: It's about legal competence and policy, notes the Supreme Court E-Library. Exclusions: Even relevant evidence can be inadmissible due to: Hearsay: Out-of-court statements offered for truth. Privilege: Confidential communications (e.g., lawyer-client). Unfair Prejudice/Confusion: Overly complex or inflammatory evidence. Waste of Time: Says Scribd.