Criminal Evidence
Presentation of criminal rules before a court of law follows the rules such as relevance, weighty, and sufficiency. Evidence should be linked to the case either directly or can be directive. It should also hold weight and can be used to guide the jury in making decisions. There are seven reasons for having rules of evidence, which include equality, values, fairness, efficiency, quality, emotions, and improper conduct. The three reasons I find most important are fairness, quality, and improper conduct. The rules governing presentation evidence should ensure that evidence presented promotes fairness when passing a decision. In my opinion, presenting evidence in a court of law allows the jury to make a fair and just decision ensuring that the innocent and set free and the guilty are sentenced. Therefore, evidence that will not heed to this policy should not be considered evidence.
Another reason for having rules of evidence is quality. Evidence presented in court should be substantial enough to settle a case. Any verdict passed should be on high quality evidence. In my opinion, a case ruling should be passed if the evidence indeed shows the defendant, without a doubt, committed the crime. If the evidence does not prove this, then it is not strong enough and should be ruled out. The final reason is improper misconduct. The rules should ensure that evidence is not gained through improper misconduct. In my opinion, I believe that even if a law enforcer is trying to gather enough evidence to incriminate a suspect, the evidence should be gained in the proper way. Some law enforcers use wrong means such as harassment during interrogation and entrapment to get a confession or submission of evidence, which is not right. Therefore, these rules should ensure that the evidence is retrieved in the appropriate way.
References
FindLaw. (n.d). Summary of the rules of evidence. Retrieved from https://corporate.findlaw.com/litigation-disputes/summary-of-the-rules-of-evidence.html