Generally, there needs to be a logical connection between the issues of the case before the court and the evidence that stands to be admitted in order for it to be relevant. This logical relevance is a matter of common sense, but is easily complicated by any attempt to define it in greater detail. We will give you two examples, one involving facts that are clearly highly relevant and the other referring to facts that are clearly irrelevant.
The accused is charged with shoplifting. The facts that the owner of the shop saw her taking an item from a shelf, hiding it under her sweater, walking out of the shop without paying for the item and being caught outside the shop in possession of an item with the shop's price tag on it, are all clearly relevant to the question whether the accused stole that particular item.
Table of Contents
1. Similar Fact Evidence
2. Previous Consistent Statement
2.1 Definition
2.2 Refer to S v Cornick 2007 (2) SACR 115 (HHA)
2.3 Exceptions: -
2.4 Explanation of each scenario is important for one to gain impressive marks. Mentioning a case, facts and reasoning of the mentioned case is also important.
3. Expert Evidence /Opinion Evidence
4. CONFESSIONS
5. HEARSAY EVIDENCE
6. CHARACTER EVIDENCE
7. ADMISSIBILITY OF UNCONSTITUTIONALLY OBTAINED EVEIDENCE
8. ADMISSIONS
Objectives and Themes
The document serves as a strategic guide for law students on how to analyze and answer legal exam questions regarding the admissibility of evidence. It focuses on core evidential categories, outlining the definitions, legal requirements, relevant case law, and exceptions necessary to construct a well-reasoned and motivated legal argument.
- Principles of evidence admissibility and logical relevance in court proceedings.
- Application of specific evidence types: Similar Fact, Expert, Hearsay, and Character evidence.
- Legal standards and requirements for the admissibility of confessions and admissions.
- Constitutional considerations and rights concerning unconstitutionally obtained evidence.
- Strategic exam techniques for referencing case law and applying facts to legal rules.
Excerpt from the Book
Similar Fact Evidence
1st: Define the Evidence
Similar fact evidence is evidence about a fact which is similar to a fact in issue. The purpose of similar fact evidence is to show that, on other occasions, a party to the proceedings acted in a similar manner to that presently being considered by the court.
Two forms of facts here:
1. Facts before the court (case currently being dealt with)
2. Facts which are similar to facts before the court ( for example, accused previous conviction which is similar to the current case )
EXAMPLE 1
The accused is charged with shoplifting. The fact that the accused has previously been convicted of shoplifting is a similar fact.
EXAMPLE 2
The state alleges that the accused has committed a number of murders in a similar manner (a typical serial killer). The facts of any one of these murders will be similar to those related to all the other charges of murder.
Summary of Chapters
1. Similar Fact Evidence: This chapter defines evidence of facts similar to those in issue and outlines the requirements for its admissibility, emphasizing logical connection and probative value through key case law.
2. Previous Consistent Statement: This chapter explores the general rule of inadmissibility for previous consistent statements, detailing the specific exceptions where such evidence may be admitted, particularly in sexual offense cases.
3. Expert Evidence /Opinion Evidence: This chapter outlines the conditions under which expert evidence is admissible, focusing on the expert's qualifications and the requirement that the evidence must assist the court.
4. CONFESSIONS: This chapter provides the legal definition of a confession and details the strict requirements for admissibility, including the necessity for the statement to be made freely and voluntarily by a person in sound mind.
5. HEARSAY EVIDENCE: This chapter defines hearsay evidence and explains why it is generally inadmissible, while highlighting the statutory exceptions and factors courts consider when exercising discretion to admit it.
6. CHARACTER EVIDENCE: This chapter discusses the protections afforded to an accused regarding their character and previous convictions, and the circumstances under which these protections may be set aside.
7. ADMISSIBILITY OF UNCONSTITUTIONALLY OBTAINED EVEIDENCE: This chapter examines the exclusion of evidence that violates constitutional rights, detailing the factors courts use to balance trial fairness against the administration of justice.
8. ADMISSIONS: This chapter distinguishes admissions from confessions and outlines the requirements for their use in legal proceedings, including the role of conduct and common law principles.
Keywords
Admissibility, Evidence, Criminal Procedure, Similar Fact, Expert Evidence, Confessions, Hearsay, Character Evidence, Constitutional Rights, Admissions, Probative Value, Relevant Evidence, Fairness, Trial, Case Law.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary purpose of these study notes?
The notes are designed to provide law students with a strategic framework for answering exam questions, focusing on the legal principles governing the admissibility of different types of evidence.
What are the core thematic fields covered in this document?
The document covers admissibility standards for various evidence types, including similar fact, expert, hearsay, character, confessions, and admissions, alongside constitutional safeguards.
What is the central research question or objective regarding evidence?
The primary objective is to determine whether specific evidence is relevant and admissible in court by applying legal rules, case precedents, and statutory requirements to the facts of a case.
Which scientific or legal method is promoted for answering questions?
The document promotes a structured analytical method: identify the central issue, define the relevant legal concept, state the general rule and exceptions, discuss applicable case law, and conclude by motivating the answer through the facts.
What key topics are addressed in the main chapters?
The main chapters systematically address rules for admissibility, constitutional exclusions of evidence, privilege, and the procedural differences between confessions and admissions.
Which keywords best characterize these legal notes?
Key terms include Admissibility, Criminal Procedure, Similar Fact, Hearsay, Expert Evidence, Confessions, and Constitutional Rights.
How is the "without prejudice" rule applied according to the text?
The rule is based on public policy to encourage dispute settlement; it protects statements made during genuine negotiations from disclosure, provided they are made in good faith.
What distinguishes a confession from an admission in these notes?
A confession is an unequivocal admission of guilt equivalent to a plea of guilty, whereas an admission is a statement or conduct adverse to the person from whom it emanates, which may or may not constitute a full confession.
What is the role of the "similar fact" rule in trial proceedings?
It allows evidence of similar past behavior if it has sufficient probative value to warrant reception, though it must be balanced against the potential for prejudice to the accused.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Zwivhuya Rasivhaga (Autor:in), 2018, How to answer questions in an exam, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/451629
