Evidence law

messages as evidence in court, verification issues and also how to create fake conversations through text messages. Evidence of text messages are primarily used by prosecutors to discredit the defendant(s) even though “prior discreditable conduct is generally inadmissible,” however, exceptions are made (R v SM, 2012 [8]). In the case of R v SM, the judge concluded that the text messages are admissible evidence for two reasons, both on the basis that the messages provided direct evidence to the defendant’s

the first four modules of the course. 1. Explain why it is that evidence gained through the forensic science process is almost always considered to be circumstantial evidence. The most important fact that makes forensic evidence circumstantial is because science cannot be clearly defined by law. The legal system have created standards and written legal rules regarding the admissibility of forensic evidence. When forensic evidence that is presented in court is rarely unaccompanied by an expert

Chapter 6: Question 2 Alyssa Chamberlain Bloomsburg University Chapter 6: Question 2 “You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a Court of law. You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you. Do you understand these rights as they have been read to you?” (What, 2015). Today these Miranda Rights are common knowledge, a staple in our Criminal Justice system that binds the rules and regulations

analyst is also, in part, to protect the rights of the defendant. The DNA analyst contributes to the trial process in that their job is to analyze evidence, according to set guidelines and procedures can sway jurors or a judge. The results from the analyst’s analysis can be entered into the court in compliance with the defendant’s right to view the evidence, a process called discovery. When they testify, they are in compliance with the defendant’s right to confront their accusers. The right to a fair

motion in limine written for my internship with the Office of the Public Defender, in which I analyzed a defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to cross-examine a witness. The defendant was charged with a crime predicated on evidence alleged to be a controlled substance that was seized by law enforcement officers and submitted to the Broward Sheriff’s Office Crime Lab for testing. Kelli McDonald, a crime lab chemist, performed the forensic analysis of the alleged controlled substance, in this case. The

to establish a forensic readiness plan are: Outline the business scenarios that involve digital evidence, this step will allow me to define what could be the threats to the business, our vulnerabilities and how it could affect our case with Mr. McBride. Next, would be Identify available sources and different types of potential evidence, this is important because we need to know what sources of evidence are existing on or could be produced by our systems. Last but not least, is what I believe is the

DYING DECLARATION “Truth sits on the lips of a person who is about to die” Introduction A Dying Declaration means the statement of a person who has died explaining the circumstances of his death. It can be said to be a statement made by a mortally injured person, indicating who has injured them and/or the circumstances surrounding their injury. The injured is aware that he/she is about to die and while the declaration is hearsay, it is admissible since it is believed that the dying person does not

requirement, expert witnesses in the relevant field are called upon to assist the fact-finding body interpret and understand evidence or opinion with which such a body is unfamiliar. The current approach to the admissibility of expert evidence within the judicial system of Wales and England is that of laissez-faire (Akers, 2000). Within laissez-faire, a number of experts’ evidence or opinion are admitted in the jury or magistrate court without adequate scrutiny since no clear guideless are applied to

a. No specific corroboration is needed to establish credibility of respondent’s statements about witnessing the public burnings of neighbors, who opposed narco-traffackers demands, and the death of her brother-in-law at the hands of narco-traffickers. Counsel for the Department of Homeland Security has asserted that Respondent’s statements about witnessing the public burning of neighbors, who had opposed the narco-traffickers, were not corroborated by the statements made by her uncle

Expert evidence is a testimony given by expert witnesses. An expert witness is therefore a person who is allowed to give their opinion in a court of law because of their knowledge or skill in a particular subject. They are providing the court with statement of opinion on any matter calling for their expertise. There are no specific rules as to who may testify as an expert. Expert witness, however, must have a sufficient knowledge and practical experience before placing their evidence in the court