Trials rely on valid evidence, but issues such as relevance, hearsay, and authentication can prevent important evidence from being heard. Laws governing admissible evidence are necessary but can lead to technicalities and miscarriages of justice. Objectivity and strict enforcement are needed for true justice.
Trials are considered the backbone of many modern legal systems. Judges and juries use the quantity and quality of evidence to determine the outcome of lawsuits, both criminal and civil. Because of its enormous importance, there are strong safeguards in place to ensure that the evidence introduced into a legal case is valid. There are many common evidence-related issues that prevent important and even vital evidence from being heard by the decision-making body.
Another important factor that can cause evidence issues is relevance. Typically, most courts require evidence to have a specific relevance that helps determine the outcome of the case. If a murder suspect has a history of violence against women, for example, the testimony and evidence related to that history may be relevant. If the murder suspect had been arrested for stealing a school mascot 20 years earlier, he would be very unlikely to be relevant and therefore probably inadmissible.
Hearsay can be another frequent cause of problems with evidence. The basic law of hearsay states that statements made by a person about a case are admissible only if the person is available for cross-examination. Yet hearsay laws are subject to various loopholes and sometimes to judge discretion, leading to considerable confusion about what is and is not hearsay. For example, if a statement explains why an action occurs rather than proving that it did, it is usually not considered hearsay and may be admissible. Public deeds, such as marriage or birth certificates, are also allowed, although the employee who filled out the record may not be a witness.
Evidence-related problems can also arise from evidence not being properly authenticated. Understandably, most courts have regulations to ensure evidence is indeed what it claims to be. For example, if the prosecution introduces a threatening letter and says it was written by the defendant to the victim, a handwriting expert or witness usually has to verify that the writing is, in fact, from the defendant. While this sounds basic, authentication laws are extremely complex, and a simple mistake on the part of the legal team can result in significant amounts of evidence being disqualified for failing to meet authentication standards.
Laws relating to admissible evidence cause quite a few problems with evidence, but are generally necessary to ensure a fair and legal trial. Unfortunately, there is always the possibility of exploiting these laws, allowing important and significant evidence to go unnoticed and unheard due to technicalities. This can certainly lead juries and judges to incorrect conclusions about the case, resulting in serious miscarriages of justice. However, for the courts to have a chance to achieve true justice, experts say objectivity in the courtroom must be challenged and the laws governing trials strictly enforced.
Protect your devices with Threat Protection by NordVPN
