Views
Graph
Explorer
Focus
Down
Load 1 level
Load 2 levels
Load 3 levels
Load 4 levels
Load all levels
All
Dagre
Focus
Down
Load 1 level
Load 2 levels
Load 3 levels
Load 4 level
Load all levels
All
Tree
SpaceTree
Focus
Expanding
Load 1 level
Load 2 levels
Load 3 levels
Down
All
Down
Radial
Focus
Expanding
Load 1 level
Load 2 levels
Load 3 levels
Down
All
Down
Box
Focus
Expanding
Down
Up
All
Down
Article
Page
Outline
Document
Down
All
Canvas
Time
Calendar
Request email digest
Past 24 hours
Past 2 days
Past 3 days
Past week
Past year
About these views
Options
Details
Show details
Hide details
Orient view
Left-Right
Top-Down
Right-Left
Bottom-Up
Expand mode
Selective
Cumulative
Label size
Smallest
Small
Big
Biggest
Slider mode
Zoom
Spread
Ancestral path
Show
Hide
Rollovers
Show
Hide
Summary texts
Show
Hide
Line formats
Line
Arrow
Bezier
Prune the view
Cross-links
Connect selected
Exclude leaves
Connect all
Disconnect
Edge labels
Show
Hide
Collapse node
Sibling order
Alphabetic
Date added
Map
Reload the current map
Start a new map
About this map
Share
Link
Bookmark
Embed
Compact format
Full format
Email
Social media
Account
My account
My timeline
My maps and bookmarks
All my ideas
Sign out
Login
Member login
Register now for a free account
Details
Context
Stream
Finder
Community
Help
Science and the Law
Map Home
100
Add to map
Post message
Move element
Cross-relate
Cite
New map
Admissibility of evidence
Issue
1
#85308
There are restrictions on what can and can't be used as evidence in court. But who decides? And what is the criterion for 'good' evidence?
Edit details
Page view
Show >>
Citations
4
Comments
0
History
Info
<< Hide
Citations
Add new citation
List by:
Citerank
Map
Link
[1]
Author:
The Law Commission - Consultation Paper no. 190
Cited by:
Stephen McGann
1:59 PM 8 December 2010 GMT
URL:
http://www.lawcom.gov.uk/docs/cp190.pdf
Excerpt / Summary
Three factors relevant to determining the admissibility of expert opinion evidence ... which are also part of the common law in England and Wales are: (1) “whether the subject matter of the opinion is such that a person without instruction or experience in the area of knowledge or human experience would be able to form a sound judgment on the matter without the assistance of a witness possessing special knowledge or experience in the area” (2) “whether the subject matter of the opinion forms part of a body of knowledge or experience which is sufficiently organized or recognized to be accepted as a reliable body of knowledge or experience, a special acquaintance with which by the witness would render his opinion of assistance to the court” and (3) “whether the witness has acquired by study or experience sufficient knowledge of the subject to render his opinion of value in resolving the issues before the court”
Link
[2]
Author:
Environmental Law Publishing - Flowchart for admissibility rules
Cited by:
Stephen McGann
2:08 PM 8 December 2010 GMT
URL:
http://www.envlaw.com.au/handout6.pdf
Excerpt / Summary
A Flowchart showing criteria of admissibility in Australian law
Link
[3]
Author:
Free dictionary definitions for 'Admissibility of Evidence'
Cited by:
Stephen McGann
2:11 PM 8 December 2010 GMT
URL:
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Admissibility+of+Evidence
Excerpt / Summary
admissible evidence isevidence which the trial judge finds is useful in helping the trier of fact (a jury if there is a jury, otherwise the judge), and which cannot be objected to on the basis that it is irrelevant, immaterial, or violates the rules against hearsay and other objections. Sometimes the evidence which a person tries to introduce has little relevant value (usually called probative value) in determining some fact, or prejudice from the jury's shock at gory details may outweigh that probative value. In criminal cases the courts tend to be more restrictive on letting the jury hear such details for fear they will result in "undue prejudice." Thus, the jury may only hear a sanitized version of the facts in prosecutions involving violence.
Link
[4]
Author:
Reed, C.
Cited by:
Stephen McGann
2:17 PM 8 December 2010 GMT
URL:
http://www.bileta.ac.uk/Document%20Library/1/The%20Admissibility%20and%20Authentication%20of%20Computer%20Evidence%20-%20A%20Confusion%20of%20Issues.p
Excerpt / Summary
The Civil Evidence Act 1968 and the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 set out requirements for the admissibility of certain types of computer-produced evidence. As part of the conditions of admissibility these statutes lay down minimum authentication requirements. However, the Acts arguably only apply to evidence that would otherwise be excluded as hearsay and not to direct or real evidence; in such a case the law contains no clear statements as to how that evidence should be authenticated. The paper argues that admissibility and authentication are separate issues, and that the failure to treat them independently gives rise to needless confusion. This failure also directs attention away fmm the urgent need for clear rules governing the authentication of computer evidence. The lack of such provisions is a substantial obstacle to all types of digital communication and data storage.
Expand subtree
Collapse subtree
Editing options
Add a new item
Edit this item
In summary
In detail
Change node type
Delete this item
Move this item
Cross-link this item
Change cross-link type
Reverse cross-link direction
Change cross-link target
Delete cross-link
Empty garbage
« Show large format
Expand
Get more messages
New comment
Show followed
Show map contributors
SORT BY:
Contributions
Latest
Alphabetical
Emerging topics
Show messages
Finder options
1. Full-text search
Search for:
Any word
All words
Exact phrase
Search in:
Ideas
Citations
Comments
Files
Search maps in same organisation only
2. Or select one of...
All map elements
Bookmarks
Get my stuff
Community options
1.
Show map contributors
2.
Upload my picture
3.
Subscribe to changes to this map
Email alerts:
Immediate
Daily digest
Weekly digest
4.
Invite people to this map
Invitation message
Invite as moderator
enter names/emails
or
enter @handles
or
get link
?
5.
Call an online meeting about this map
6.
No Debategraph mail
Hide presence
?
Moderator-only functions
1.
Make this map public
uncheck to make private
2.
Lock all map elements
uncheck to unlock
3.
Select interface language
Options
Deutsch
English
Español
Français
Ελληνικά
Lietuvių
Nederlands
Русский
add a new new language
4.
Affiliate map to an organization
?
5.
Broadcast to map community
Cancel
6.
Empty map trash bin
Cancel
7.
Appoint an additional Moderator
Cancel
8.
Resign as moderator
Cancel
9.
Divide this map
Cancel
?
10.
Show visits in last:
Day
Week
Cumulative
11.
Allow Document
?
12.
Delete this map
Cancel
13.
Hide edit history
14.
Add map to a cluster
Remove
or make new group
Name your group
Submit
?
15.
Change map ontology
Options
Standard (default) ontology
Article ontology
Competitive debate ontology
Hypothesis ontology
Influence diagram ontology
Note graph ontology
Story ontology
16.
Change map license
Options
All Rights Reserved
CC BY
CC BY-SA
CC BY-NC-SA
?
17.
Request map analytics
Block email digests
18.
Copy this map
Private copy
19.
Include comments in graph
No meetings are scheduled at present
Headingx
Summaryx
Interface language
English
Deutsch
Español
Français
Ελληνικά
Lietuvių
Nederlands
Русский
Private map
Cancel
Focus
Focus
Load
1 Level
2 Levels
3 Levels
Down
All
Redraw
Focus
Expanding
Down
Up
All
Editing options
Add a new item
Edit this item
In summary
In detail
Delete this item
Move this item
Cross-link this item
Connect cross-links
Collapse node
Prune the view
Delete cross-link
Heading
Change element type
Show all types
Summary
Details
Lock
Cancel
Preview
Save
x
Select file to upload
-1