Since not all cases will involve the introduction of
hearsay evidence, there will tend to be differing contextual standards of justification for knowledge attributions in criminal cases that do involve the admission of hearsay from those that do not.
a)
Hearsay evidence is presumptively inadmissible unless it falls under an exception to the hearsay rule.
2012) (citations omitted) ("Ordinarily, we review the admission of
hearsay evidence for an abuse of discretion.
Big investigatory technique should be subject to routine exclusion under the principled approach to
hearsay evidence.
104) Although
hearsay evidence is admissible in a criminal court "probable cause" hearing in a misdemeanor case, it is not admissible at a felony probable cause hearing.
Hearsay Exceptions--One of the most common misunderstandings related to
hearsay evidence is the belief that the public records exception set forth in F.
The Anglo-Australian legal system has excluded
hearsay evidence for several centuries.
99) So even if, for the sake of argument, we assume that judges are indeed better than juries at not overestimating the value of
hearsay evidence, at recognizing the risks of non-original documents, at taking alleged expertise with a grain of salt, at giving character and prior acts showing a propensity to commit some current act their proper weight, and so on, it appears that we also have reason to believe that the gap between jurors and judges in this regard, even if it does exist, will be systematically over-assessed by the judges themselves.
He explains such terms as direct evidence, real evidence, and circumstantial evidence and clarifies the often confusing rule against
hearsay evidence and notes the various "exceptions" to that rule that are typically pertinent to the testifying social worker.
The court refused to admit into evidence letters written by a pair of mental health professionals that discussed the woman's diagnosis and lack of treatment adherence because the letters constituted inadmissible
hearsay evidence.
3) This "unreliability" is considered to be a product of several factors: (1)
hearsay evidence is often not the best evidence of a fact because more direct statements or other evidence have far more probative value; (2) a hearsay statement is almost never made under oath; (3) other parties do not have a chance to cross-examine the maker of a hearsay statement; and (4) with a hearsay statement, the judge and jury do not get an opportunity to observe the demeanor of the declarant for credibility purposes.
Supreme Court made a broad ruling regarding
hearsay evidence that asserted the rights of an accused to "be confronted with the witnesses against him.
