Chapter 2: Evidence

Admissible Evidence

Evidence that is determined to be admitted into evidence and be considered in rendering the decision

Associative Evidence

Establishment of a relationship between objects (evidence and other items) through examination; evidence that establishes that relationship

Circumstantial Evidence

relies on an inference to connect it to a conclusion of fact

Class-Characteristic Evidence

properties of evidence that can only be associated with a group and not a single source.

> Measurable features of an item that indicate a restricted group source based on design factors determined prior to manufacture.

> May be shown to be like or consistent with a questioned source, although not uniquely identifiable with that source.

Daubert hearings

-A standard for determining the reliability of scientific expert testimony in court currently adopted by many jurisdictions.

-Trial judge is responsible for determining if the scientific evidence is useful and relevant. The judge must determine if the testing methods relies on a reasonable scientific foundation.

Daubert trilogy

Three cases decided in the 1990s that are used by federal and other courts to determine the admissibility of scientific evidence

Direct evidence

Information that establishes a fact directly, without the need for further inference- for example, an eyewitness' testimony that the defendant fired the fatal shot

Exculpatory evidence

Evidence that tends to exonerate the accused party

Exemplar

Example or representative item usually in undamaged or less damaged condition to which a damaged item can be compared. or Writing that is produced upon request

Federal Rules of Evidence

Federal guidelines designed to guide federal courts in determining if scientific evidence is admissible

Forensic evidence

Broadly, physical or opinion evidence that is generated by a forensic practitioner or one hired in a forensic role

Frye standard

-A standard applied in some jurisdictions to the admissibility of scientific theory and method in court.

-It requires that new methods be generally acceptable to a significant proportion of the scientific discipline to which they belong.

General acceptance

A shorthand description of the Frye decision which dictated that scientific evidence is admissible if it has achieved general acceptance by the relevant scientific community

Gatekeeper

The term used in relationship to the Daubert decision ; the judge is designated as the one who determines admissibility under these rules and is thus the gatekeeper.

Identification Evidence

Evidence that provides positive identification of the source; this term is falling out of favor

Inculpatory Evidence

Evidence that tends to implicate the accused party

Individual Characteristics

Feature that is unique to a specific item; information in a specific context about some aspect of a crime scene. Examples include a print left by a shoe consistent in all respects to a defendant's shoe, a hair consistent in all respects to a sample of hair from a Caucasian female, or handwriting features attributable to a particular person.

Reconstruction evidence

Evidence of the events leading to , occurring during, and occurring after a crime is committed

Rules of evidence

Generally, the rules used by a court to determine if scientific evidence will be admitted

The rules of evidence are exclusionary. Explain what this means

it serves to filter out information presented by either side that may be irrelevant to the factual and legal issues at hand or that violate long-standing prohibitions such as those against the admissibility of hearsay or prejudicial information.

Foundation needed for the towel found from the homicide scene to be admitted as forensic evidence

The intent for it to become evidence and to be analyzed.

Differences between the Frye admissibility standards and the Daubert admissibility standards?

Frye: General acceptance by scientific community

Daubert: General acceptance is not an absolute requirement for determining admissibility; it is the responsibility of the trial judge to determine if scientific evidence is relevant and reliable.