Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Rules of Evidence. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
This 4 page paper examines rules of evidence, inclusive of the exclusionary rule. Other rules are discussed. Examples are provided. Bibliography lists 4 sources.
Page Count:
4 pages (~225 words per page)
File: RT13_SA529evi.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
is that the jury has to come to a conclusion based on the evidence provided (Melilli, 1998). This is something that goes to an individuals general tendency to behave in
a particular manner (Melilli, 1998). Another thing is that the jury is supposed to measure the probability that the same individual does behave in congruence with that on a particular
occasion (Melilli, 1998). The essential feature that goes to character evidence has to do with relevance and is dependent on a conclusion regarding an individuals general propensity (Melilli, 1998).
If in fact the evidence does have relevance and is not necessarily related to a conclusion regarding general propensity, that is not considered to be character evidence (Melilli, 1998). In
fact, it is not barred by the character evidence rule (Melilli, 1998). Concerns about the character evidence rule has to do with permitting a jury to draw conclusions based on
the "general propensity of a criminal defendant" (Melilli, 1998, p.1547). If the introduction as it respects character evidence that goes against the accused may be defended, the use of
character evidence is appropriate also (Melilli, 1998). Character evidence rules are only a part of evidence rules but it provides a good example of why some evidence is not
permitted. If a defendant had committed a crime in the past, and the trial is for a similar crime, then the evidence would be deemed too prejudicial. That is, the
jury is likely to put two and two together and claim that the defendant probably committed a certain act because a similar act had been committed in the past. While
it is common sense, it obviously impedes fairness in a trial situation. It is certainly possible that a defendant had been accused of the same crime more than once, even
...