THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE: 3 FORMS OF EVIDENCE

CHAPTER OUTLINE

• Relevance

• Materiality

• Competency

• Real Evidence

• Direct Versus Circumstantial Evidence

• Circumstantial Inferences of Guilt

  • Means, Motive, and Opportunity

  • Guilty Actions and Consciousness of Guilt

  • Concealment

  • Sudden Wealth

  • Flight to Avoid Prosecution and Threatening of Witnesses

  • Admissions by Conduct

• Guilty Mind

• Other Uses of Circumstantial Evidence

  • Inference of Possession

  • Automobiles

  • Prior False Claims and Lack of Accident

  • Inferences That May Not Be Drawn

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

1. Examine what comprises circumstantial versus direct evidence.

2. Explain the different types of evidence.

3. Explain the difference between "guilty actions" and "guilty minds."

4. Explain the role the character plays in the admissibility of evidence.

5. Examine the situations in which prior bad acts may be introduced as evidence.

6. Explain the uses of circumstantial evidence to infer guilt.

7. Examine the differences between presumptions, inferences, and judicial notice.

8. Distinguish between the four general areas of judicial notice.

DEFINITION OF EVIDENCE

• General Definition: Evidence refers to any means by which the veracity of a fact in question can be established or proved. It is used to demonstrate the truth or untruth of allegations in a court of law.

  • Wigmore Definition: Evidence is defined as "any knowable fact or group of facts offered to or considered by a legal tribunal for the purpose of producing a persuasion, affirmative or negative, on the part of the tribunal, as to a proposition of fact (not of law or of logic) on which the determination of the tribunal is to be given" (Wigmore, 1942: 1).

• Evidence can be tangible (e.g., murder weapon, photographs, documents, records) or intangible (e.g., motive, means, eyewitness accounts).

• Not all material may be admitted into court. Exclusion may occur if it does not satisfy constitutional requirements, discussed in Chapter 5.

RULES OF EVIDENCE

Article IV: Relevancy and Its Limits

• Rule 401 - Definition of "Relevant Evidence": Relevant evidence means any evidence which tends to make the existence of any fact that is consequential to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.

• Rule 402 - Relevant Evidence Generally Admissible: Irrelevant Evidence Inadmissible: All relevant evidence is admissible, unless otherwise provided by the U.S. Constitution, Act of Congress, these rules, or other rules prescribed by the Supreme Court. Irrelevant evidence is inadmissible.

• Rule 403 - Excluding Relevant Evidence: The court may exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by any danger of unfair prejudice, confusing issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.

RELEVANCE

• The cornerstone of evidence admissibility is relevancy. Evaluation must weigh the probative value carefully to serve justice interests.

• Mueller and Kirkpatrick's four evaluative schemes:

  1. Evidence must make the point in question more probable than not.

  2. Relevance may be based only when a deduction from evidence is more probable than others.

  3. Evaluation of "plus value" established by Wigmore, relevant if probative value is greater than minimal.

  4. Final standard based on demonstrating the truth of the point in question.

CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

• Used in various applications to infer guilt:

  • Proof of Intent: Establishing if the defendant intended to commit a crime.

  • Given Examples: Inferences of guilt or consciousness based on circumstantial evidence.

  • Case Examples:

  • T. Cullen Davis: Circumstantial evidence included witnesses, forensic evidence linking to the crime.

  • Legal Precedents: Evidence must provide enough circumstantial relevance to establish a guilty verdict.

MEANS, MOTIVE, AND OPPORTUNITY

• The law does not obligate the prosecutor to prove means, motive, or opportunity but proves them further strengthens the case.

• Case Example - O. J. Simpson: Discussions around athletic ability indicating physical means to commit crimes versus physical incapacity due to sports injuries.

GUILTY ACTIONS AND CONSCIOUSNESS OF GUILT

• Sudden behavioral changes post-crime can infer consciousness of guilt.

• Other actions include concealment of evidence, uncharacteristic purchases, or flight to avoid prosecution.

  • Examples: Sudden wealth or high spending by a defendant without reasonable explanations.

POST COHORTINIZING: REFUSAL TO TESTIFY AND RIGHT TO COUNSEL

• Invoking rights, like refusal to testify or request for counsel, cannot be taken as indicative of guilt as per the Fifth Amendment. Suppressed inference of guilt due to exercising these rights.

CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE: LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

• Circumstantial evidence requires additional scrutiny as opposed to direct evidence. The impact could be profound in a wrongful conduct scenario, such as presenting a past pattern of behavior to indicate present actions.

ADMISSIONS BY CONDUCT

• Forms of admissions, including actions taken or statements made, significantly impact cases as they may indicate mindset or intent post-offense.

KEY TERMS

• Adjudicative Facts: Facts that would require proof unless judicially noticed.

• Alibi: Proof of whereabouts at the time of an alleged crime.

• Circumstantial Evidence: Evidence requiring an inference to prove its connection with the crime.

• Competent Evidence: Evidence that conforms with legal standards for the court.

• Inferences: Logical deductions that can be made based on presented evidence.

• Judicial Notice: Court's acceptance of evidence as fact without formal proof.

• Legislative Facts: Facts related to the interpretation of statutes or constitutional provisions.

• Materiality: Evidence that logically connects to a fact at issue.

• Means & Motive: Ability and reason for committing the crime.

• Modus Operandi: Patterns of behavior in committing similar crimes.