Evidence law

Exception to Hearsay Case: Shepard v. United States, 290 U.S. 96, 54 S.Ct.22, 78 L.Ed. 196. (1933) Facts: Shepard, defendant, was charged and convicted of the murdering his wife. Prosecution introduced statement Shepard’s wife made to the nurse as evidences during the trial. Shepard’s wife told her nurse stating that her husband had poisoned her. She also asked the nurse to find the whiskey bottle from defendant’s closet and perform the poison test which she had drunk from. The prosecution introduced

An expert witness is a person who is qualified with special skills or knowledge. The role of the expert witness is to help the jury understand the evidence (Olson, 2011.) The testimony of an expert witness is important in understanding the evidence in a clearer manner, even the opinions offered by expert witnesses should be based off special knowledge, skills, experience, training, or education (Buckles, 2007.) The knowledge of an expert witness should exceed that of the average person, however he/she

testimony, however, was unreliable to the efforts the defense tried to make to clear Hooker. Although the expert witnesses played a significant role in the determination of the case, they were not the only means of evidence in this case. There was also a substantial amount of physical evidence that ultimately led to Hookers

circumstantial evidence. However, as I’ve listened to the evidence presented, I've changed my mind and now believe you’re a cold hard killer with no conscious. According to the evidence, you committed a most heinous senseless murder by smashing your mother's head and dumping her body in the trash. The court sentences you to die in the death chamber at the State Prison. Get her out of here,” the judge said as the

The movie My Cousin Vinny follows two young men, Bill and Stan, as they embark on their journey to UCLA. Along the way, they become hungry and decide to stop at the Sack Of Suds, an unassuming little convenience store in Alabama, to buy a few refreshments. After leaving the store, Bill discovers that he has accidentally forgotten to pay for a can of tuna. Soon following his realization, the men get pulled over by a cop and are arrested. After a short interrogation by the police, Stan confesses to

Dear James Blackburn, thank you for contacting me with your case. As an expert witness, I am more than happy to assist you in the examination of the prosecution witness’ evidence and account of the incident. Firstly, we must consider any confounding factors that may have influenced the witness’ memory and therefore influencing their testimony. Some factors we must consider are; cross-race effect (CRE), weapon focus effect, own age bias (OAB) and the bystander effect. I will attempt to aid you in

The definition of hearsay is “a statement a party offers in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted in the statement.” FRE 801(c)(2). Song’s testimony is not hearsay because Song is a party opponent in this case. FRE 801(d)(2)(A). In this case, the testimony would be admissible under FRE 804(b)(1) because the Kensington cooking class instructor is not available to testify under FRE 804(a)(4). Also, the instructor gave statement directly to Song at the cooking class in the same way that

Guralnick music history texts are well sourced and utilize a variety of different points of primary sources, perspectives, and recollections. In addition to many printed materials, Guralnick interviews many of the participants. Guralnick observed in a November 14, 2016, interview at the Country Music Hall of Fame that his recent biography Sam Phillips: The Man Who Invented Rock ’n’ Roll, was the first time he had access to the subject of one his biographies. However, in his genre based works, such

inadmissible evidence in the courtroom. They want to know exactly when and what type of evidence can be omitted while in trial. Werner, Kagehiro, and Strube (1982) tested participants looking for authoritarians that would have had the anti-defendant bias. Authoritarians are more likely to be unable to disregard inadmissible evidence because have a bias against the defendant from the start. Acting like mock jurors, they all read summaries of a trial that held six pieces of circumstantial evidence presented

witness’ is not defined in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Yet, provisions are present in the Act which deal with the quandary. According to Section 132 of the Act, the witness has to answer questions even if the answers to such questions will or can criminate the witness or expose the witness to a penalty or forfeiture. The proviso states that such an answer cannot subject the witness to any arrest or prosecution except a prosecution for providing false evidence. Thus, the protection accorded under