CHAPTER 2: RELEVANCE Prof. JANICKE 2016

DIRECT vs. CIRCUMSTANTIAL: DOES IT MATTER ?? EYEWITNESS TO A FACT IN ISSUE CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVERYTHING ELSE 2016 Chap. 2 -- Relevance

WHICH IS MORE PERSUASIVE? TRADITIONALLY: EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY WAS THOUGHT MORE RELIABLE MODERN VIEW: UNRELIABLE FOR STRANGERS: DNA OR FINGERPRINTS MORE RELIABLE 2016 Chap. 2 -- Relevance

DIRECT TESTIMONY IS FAIRLY RELIABLE FOR PERSONS THE WITNESS KNOWS WELL, PROVIDED NO ANIMUS TO FALSIFY NO FRAUD DRIVING THE TESTIMONY 2016 Chap. 2 -- Relevance

CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE CAN BE POWERFUL D’s UNEXPLAINED FINGERPRINTS FOUND D’S KNIFE FOUND D EARLIER THREATENED TO KILL VICTIM LOOT FOUND UNDER D’S BED D HAS FIVE PRIOR CONVICTIONS WITH SAME M.O 2016 Chap. 2 -- Relevance

PROBLEMS/CASES OLD CHIEF (PART 1) PROB. 2A PROB. 2B PROB. 2C PROB. 2D 2016 Chap. 2 -- Relevance

THE CONCEPT OF PROBATIVE VALUE MEASURING THE TENDENCY TO CONVINCE THE TRIER ON A RELEVANT FACT >>> 2016 Chap. 2 -- Relevance

JUDGES HAVE TO “WEIGH” PROBATIVE VALUE IN RULING ON RELEVANCE vs. THE COUNTERWEIGHTS (R.403: UNFAIR PREJUDICE; WASTE OF TIME; CONFUSION OF THE JURY) AN APPLES-TO-ORANGES COMPARISON, BUT DONE EVERY DAY 2016 Chap. 2 -- Relevance

ADMISSIBILITY vs. SUFFICIENCY 2016 Chap. 2 -- Relevance

ADMISSIBILITY STANDING ALONE, THAT PIECE MAY NOT BE ENOUGH TO JUSTIFY ANY CONCLUSION ON THE FACT INVOLVED 2016 Chap. 2 -- Relevance

SUFFICIENCY ENOUGH TOTAL EVIDENCE THAT REASONABLE JURORS COULD FIND THAT THE PROOF STANDARD (PREPONDERANCE, REASONABLE DOUBT, CLEAR AND CONVINCING, ETC.) HAS BEEN MET 2016 Chap. 2 -- Relevance

PROBLEMS/CASES: STATE v. CHAPPLE SHOWS THE CAREFUL CHECKING OF PROBATIVE VALUE vs. RISK OF PREJUDICE UNFORTUNATE ROLE OF JURORS: SOMETHING AWFUL HAS HAPPENED THEY HAVE ONLY ONE WAY TO “DO SOMETHING” ABOUT IT 2016 Chap. 2 -- Relevance

PROBLEMS/CASES 2E – BATTERED WIFE 2F – EXPLODING GAS TANK 2G – MY INSURANCE 2016 Chap. 2 -- Relevance

THE HALF-OPEN DOOR RULES SEVERAL OF THEM IN EVIDENCE LAW ONE IS ABOUT DOCUMENTS: INTRO OF PORTION BY ONE PARTY IS OK BUT IS A WAIVER OF OBJECTIONS FOR ANY RELATED PARTS OFFERED BY ADVERSE PARTY [R106] R106: COURT CAN REQUIRE ADMISSION OF THE OTHER PARTS “AT THAT TIME” – i.e., NOW 2016 Chap. 2 -- Relevance

RULE EXTENDS WHEN AN ENTIRE DOCUMENT IS OFFERED AND ADMITTED, R. 106 EXTENDS TO OTHER DOCUMENTS THAT SHOULD IN FAIRNESS BE CONSIDERED TOGETHER WITH IT CAN COMPEL ADMISSION AT THE TIME 2016 Chap. 2 -- Relevance

PROBLEMS/CASES 2H – POWER ROLLBACK 2I – RAID ON CEDAR WOODS 2016 Chap. 2 -- Relevance

PROBABILISTIC EVIDENCE HELPFUL, BUT CAN BE MISUSED OFTEN COUNTERINTUITIVE COMMON BIRTHDAYS (MONTH, DAY) IN THIS ROOM? 2016 Chap. 2 -- Relevance