Explain why evidence that is not relevant is not admissible, but not all relevant evidence is admissible.
What will be an ideal response?
Evidence that is not relevant is not admissible. However, even relevant evidence can be inadmissible. Evidence may be excluded from trial for reasons that have nothing to do with logical relevance. One such reason for exclusion is when the evidence has a tendency to unduly prejudice or inflame the minds of the jury. Relevant evidence may also be excluded because it would tend to cause confusion or create so many side issues that trial time would be wasted if it was admitted.
You might also like to view...
This conflict exists within the individual and usually is some form of cognitive conflicts?
A. Personal B. Group C. Inter-organizational D. Intra-organizational
The aim of ______ is to remove offenders from society to prevent them from continuing to menace others.
a. specific deterrence b. general deterrence c. rehabilitation d. incapacitation
Why is the task of criminological theory construction so demanding? How do we know if a theory is any good?
What will be an ideal response?
A facility authorized to hold pretrial detainees and sentenced misdemeanants for periods no longer than 48 hours is called a ______________________
Fill in the blank(s) with correct word