Evidence in the United States

Material presented as proof at a trial. Evidence provides the basis upon which a fact dispute is resolved. Evidence generally takes the form of witness testimony or physical objects such as documents and records. Parties to a dispute are entitled to submit evidence that will support their respective positions before the trier of fact. Submissions or evidence are governed by rules enforced by the court. Evidence that fails to meet evidentiary standards is not placed before the fact-finder.

See Also

rules of evidence, 183.

Analysis and Relevance

Evidence is offered to support a claim or allegation. There are three broad types or classes of evidence. The first is direct evidence, which comes in the form of witness testimony. If a witness actually saw an event or heard something relating to a particular dispute, he or she may convey that information to the court. The party calling the witness elicits some information through a series of questions called direct examination. The opposing party is then able to respond through cross-examination. Second, there is indirect or circumstantial evidence, which is not based on direct knowledge, but rather deductions that are drawn from other facts. Circumstantial evidence speaks indirectly to the dispute. Third, there is real or demonstrative evidence. This class of evidence consists of objects that themselves relate to the fact question before the court. A gun with fingerprints or financial records are examples of real evidence.

Notes and References

1. Definition of Evidence from the American Law Dictionary, 1991, California

Evidence Definition

That which tends to prove or disprove any matter in question, or to influence the belief respecting it. Belief is produced by the consideration of something presented to the mind. The matter thus presented, in whatever shape it may come, and through whatever material organ it is derived is evidence. Prof. Parker, Lectures on Medical Jurisprudence, in Dartmouth College, N. H.. , . , , The word evidence, in legal acceptation, includes all the means by which any alleged matter of fact, the truth of which is submitted to investigation, is estabhshed or disproved. 1 Greenl. Ev. c. 1, § 1. That which is legally submitted to a jury, to enable them to decide upon the questions in dispute, or issues, as pointed out by the pleadings, and distinguished from all comment and argument, is termed evidence. 1 Starkie, Ev. pt. 1, § 3. Any matter of fact the effect, tendency, or design of which is to produce in the mind a persuasion affirmative or disaffirmative of the existence of some other matter of fact. Best, Ev. § 11. Evidence is to be distinguished from proof. Evidence is not proof, but the medium of proof. Proof is the effect or result of evidence. 1 Greenl. Ev. § 1. Proof is the perfection of evidence. Without evidence there can be no proof, though there may be evidence which does not amount to proof. Wills, Circ. Ev. 2. It is also to be distinguished from testimony, which excludes documentary evidence. Testimony embraces only the declaration of witnesses made under oath. Testimony is but one of the several instruments of evidence, and cannot be considered the equivalent thereof, for evidence embraces not only testimony, but private writings and public documents. Thomp. Trials, § 2784; 3 Wyo. 388; 7 Ind. 94; 76 Hun (N. Y.) 427. Evidence may be classified with reference to its instruments, its nature, its legal character, its effect, its object.
(1) The instruments , of evidence, in the legal acceptation of the term, are: (a) Judicial notice or recognition, being notice taken by the court, without the introduction of proof by the parties of matters, such as the territorial extent of their jurisdiction, local divisions of their own countries, seats of courts, etc. If the judge needs information on subjects, he will seek it from such sources as he deems authentic. See 1 Greenl. Ev. c. 2. (b) Documentary evidence, including public records. The registers of official transactions made by officers appointed for the purpose; as, the public statutes, the judgments and proceedings of courts, etc. Judicial writings, such as inquisitions, depositions, etc. Public documents having a semi-official character, as, the statute books published under the authority of the government, documents printed by the authority of congress, etc. Private writings, as, deeds, contracts, wills. (c) Parol evidence, being the testimony of witnesses. (d) Real evidence, being that which is addressed to the senses of the court without the intervention of testimony, as by the production in court of an object.
(2) In its nature, evidence is direct or indirect. (a) Direct evidence is that means of proof which tends to show the existence of a fact in question, without the intervention of the proof of any other fact. It is that evidence which, if believed, establishes the truth of a fact in issue, and does not arise from any presumption. Evidence is direct and positive when the very facts in dispute are communicated by those who have the actual knowledge of them by means of their senses. 1 Phil. Ev. 116; 1 Starkie, Ev. 19; Burrill, Circ. Ev. 4; 1 Greenl. Ev. § 13. (b) Indirect (evidence is that which is applied to the principal fact indirectly by the proof of circumstances from which the principal fact is inferred. Indirect evidence is commonly known as circumstantial evidence. See Circumstantial Evidence. Evidence has also been divided into real or demonstrative evidence, and moral evidence, the latter including all evidence which is not demonstrative. Brad. Ev. § 15; Gamb. Moral Ev. 121.
(3) With regard to its legal character, evidence is either primary or secondary. (a) Primary, sometimes called best, evidence is that which most certainly exhibits the true state of facts to which it relates. The rule is one of quality of evidence, not of quantity (17 Md. 67), and is not based on mere credibility, but on the degree of proximity of the proof to the principal fact to be proved. See Best Evidence. (b) Secondary evidence is any evidence suggesting in its nature that there is more direct evidence of the same fact. Hearsay evidence is a tjrpe of secondary evidence. See Hearsay Evidence.
(4) As to its effect, evidence is either prima facie or conclusive. (a) Prima facie evidence is that evidence which is sufficient proof respecting the matter in question until it is contradicted, but which may be contradicted or controlled. Satisfactory evidence is that which produces the degree of certainty required in the case in hand. 1 Greenl. Ev. § 6; 70 Mo. 248. (b) Conclusive evidence is that which establishes the fact, and is not subject to contradiction.
(5) As to its object, evidence is either substantive evidence, or evidence to credibility. (a) Substantive evidence is that addressed directly to the point in controversy. (b) Evidence to credibility is that which neither proves nor disproves the principal fact, but merely impeaches or sustains witnesses by whom the principal fact has been proved or disproved. Among the kinds of substantive evidence are cumulative evidence, which is further evidence of the same kind to the same point, and corroborative evidence, which is further evidence of a different kind to the same point. Underh. Ev. § 2.

Evidence in Foreign Legal Encyclopedias

Link	Description
Evidence	Evidence in the World Legal Encyclopedia.
Evidence	Evidence in the European Legal Encyclopedia.
Evidence	Evidence in the Asian Legal Encyclopedia.
Evidence	Evidence in the UK Legal Encyclopedia.
Evidence	Evidence in the Australian Legal Encyclopedia.

Back to Top

Browse the American Encyclopedia of Law for Evidence

Scan Evidence in the appropriate area of law:

Link	Description
Evidence	Evidence in the Family Law Portal of the American Encyclopedia of Law.
Evidence	Evidence in the IP Portal of the American Encyclopedia of Law.
Evidence	Evidence in the Commercial Law Portal of the American Encyclopedia of Law.
Evidence	Evidence in the Criminal Law Portal of the American Encyclopedia of Law.
Evidence	Evidence in the Antritrust Portal of the American Encyclopedia of Law.
Evidence	Evidence in the Bankruptcy Law Portal of the American Encyclopedia of Law.
Evidence	Evidence in the Constitutional Law Portal of the American Encyclopedia of Law.
Evidence	Evidence in the Tax Law Portal of the American Encyclopedia of Law.
Evidence	Evidence in the and Finance and Banking Portal of the American Encyclopedia of Law.
Evidence	Evidence in the Employment and Labor Portal of the American Encyclopedia of Law.
Evidence	Evidence in the Personal Injury and Tort Portal of the American Encyclopedia of Law.
Evidence	Evidence in the Environmental Law Portal of the American Encyclopedia of Law.

Back to Top

Explore other Reference Works

Resource	Description
Evidence in the Dictionaries	Evidence in our legal dictionaries
http://lawi.us/evidence	The URI of Evidence (more about URIs)
Evidence related entries	Find related entries of Evidence

Back to Top

Legal Issue for Attorneys

That which tends to prove or disprove any matter in question, or to influence the belief respecting it. Belief is produced by the consideration of something presented to the mind. The matter thus presented, in whatever shape it may come, and through whatever material organ it is derived is evidence. Prof. Parker, Lectures on Medical Jurisprudence, in Dartmouth College, N. H.. , . , , The word evidence, in legal acceptation, includes all the means by which any alleged matter of fact, the truth of which is submitted to investigation, is estabhshed or disproved. 1 Greenl. Ev. c. 1, § 1. That which is legally submitted to a jury, to enable them to decide upon the questions in dispute, or issues, as pointed out by the pleadings, and distinguished from all comment and argument, is termed evidence. 1 Starkie, Ev. pt. 1, § 3. Any matter of fact the effect, tendency, or design of which is to produce in the mind a persuasion affirmative or disaffirmative of the existence of some other matter of fact. Best, Ev. § 11. Evidence is to be distinguished from proof. Evidence is not proof, but the medium of proof. Proof is the effect or result of evidence. 1 Greenl. Ev. § 1. Proof is the perfection of evidence. Without evidence there can be no proof, though there may be evidence which does not amount to proof. Wills, Circ. Ev. 2. It is also to be distinguished from testimony, which excludes documentary evidence. Testimony embraces only the declaration of witnesses made under oath. Testimony is but one of the several instruments of evidence, and cannot be considered the equivalent thereof, for evidence embraces not only testimony, but private writings and public documents. Thomp. Trials, § 2784; 3 Wyo. 388; 7 Ind. 94; 76 Hun (N. Y.) 427. Evidence may be classified with reference to its instruments, its nature, its legal character, its effect, its object.
(1) The instruments , of evidence, in the legal acceptation of the term, are: (a) Judicial notice or recognition, being notice taken by the court, without the introduction of proof by the parties of matters, such as the territorial extent of their jurisdiction, local divisions of their own countries, seats of courts, etc. If the judge needs information on subjects, he will seek it from such sources as he deems authentic. See 1 Greenl. Ev. c. 2. (b) Documentary evidence, including public records. The registers of official transactions made by officers appointed for the purpose; as, the public statutes, the judgments and proceedings of courts, etc. Judicial writings, such as inquisitions, depositions, etc. Public documents having a semi-official character, as, the statute books published under the authority of the government, documents printed by the authority of congress, etc. Private writings, as, deeds, contracts, wills. (c) Parol evidence, being the testimony of witnesses. (d) Real evidence, being that which is addressed to the senses of the court without the intervention of testimony, as by the production in court of an object.
(2) In its nature, evidence is direct or indirect. (a) Direct evidence is that means of proof which tends to show the existence of a fact in question, without the intervention of the proof of any other fact. It is that evidence which, if believed, establishes the truth of a fact in issue, and does not arise from any presumption. Evidence is direct and positive when the very facts in dispute are communicated by those who have the actual knowledge of them by means of their senses. 1 Phil. Ev. 116; 1 Starkie, Ev. 19; Burrill, Circ. Ev. 4; 1 Greenl. Ev. § 13. (b) Indirect (evidence is that which is applied to the principal fact indirectly by the proof of circumstances from which the principal fact is inferred. Indirect evidence is commonly known as circumstantial evidence. See Circumstantial Evidence. Evidence has also been divided into real or demonstrative evidence, and moral evidence, the latter including all evidence which is not demonstrative. Brad. Ev. § 15; Gamb. Moral Ev. 121.
(3) With regard to its legal character, evidence is either primary or secondary. (a) Primary, sometimes called best, evidence is that which most certainly exhibits the true state of facts to which it relates. The rule is one of quality of evidence, not of quantity (17 Md. 67), and is not based on mere credibility, but on the degree of proximity of the proof to the principal fact to be proved. See Best Evidence. (b) Secondary evidence is any evidence suggesting in its nature that there is more direct evidence of the same fact. Hearsay evidence is a tjrpe of secondary evidence. See Hearsay Evidence.
(4) As to its effect, evidence is either prima facie or conclusive. (a) Prima facie evidence is that evidence which is sufficient proof respecting the matter in question until it is contradicted, but which may be contradicted or controlled. Satisf
actory evidence is that which produces the degree of certainty required in the case in hand. 1 Greenl. Ev. § 6; 70 Mo. 248. (b) Conclusive evidence is that which establishes the fact, and is not subject to contradiction.
(5) As to its object, evidence is either substantive evidence, or evidence to credibility. (a) Substantive evidence is that addressed directly to the point in controversy. (b) Evidence to credibility is that which neither proves nor disproves the principal fact, but merely impeaches or sustains witnesses by whom the principal fact has been proved or disproved. Among the kinds of substantive evidence are cumulative evidence, which is further evidence of the same kind to the same point, and corroborative evidence, which is further evidence of a different kind to the same point. Underh. Ev. § 2.

More Resources

• Access Points
• Thesaurus
• Index
• Historical Collections
• Glossary
• Notice

Access Points to the American Encyclopedia of Law

Access to the Encyclopedia is provided by alphabetical arrangement of entries, table of cases, table of laws, briefs and tables of contents.

Legal Thesaurus Dictionary

Because some legal concepts are too complicated to compress to a single word or term, the legal thesaurus dictionary allows the reader to search for groups of terms, including synonyms, antonyms, expanded legal meanings and other terms the reader is likely to use. The resource includes lists, synonym rings , subject categories, taxonomies and a number of schemes.

Legal Indexes

The Index is a collection of entries to allow users to locate information in the Lawi Projects. After write down relevant words and phrases that you need, begin looking up the words and phrases using the index until you have located an applicable subject to review.

Indexes of All Encyclopedias:
A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | Z

Index	Description
General Index	Index of general information about the Encyclopedia
Classified index	Headings arranged on the basis of relations among concepts represented by headings, based on the Lawi Classification Scheme
Topical Index	A comprehensive and easy guide to the topics of the legal Encyclopedia
Citation Index	Index of links between citing and cited entries
Subject Index	Identify and describe the subjects of the Encyclopedia
Alphabetical Index	A-Z Index of all the Entries
Thematic Index	Correlation of terms in a meaningful hierarchical order
Permutation Index	A type of index in which significant words in the titles function as subject headings
Browse Index	Browse the Encyclopedia by Index
Sitemap Index	Sitemap Index, including Taxonomies

Notice

This definition of Evidence Is based on the The Cyclopedic Law Dictionary . This definition needs to be proofread..

Plain-English Law

Evidence as defined by Nolo’s Encyclopedia of
Everyday Law (p. 437-455):

The many types of information presented to a judge or jury to convince them of the truth or falsity of the key facts in a case. Evidence may include testimony of witnesses, documents, photographs, items of damaged property, government records, videos, or laboratory reports.

Evidence

United States Constitution

According to the Encyclopedia of the American Constitution, about its article titled EVIDENCEExcepting cases that may be decided by applying legal rules to undisputed facts, the determination of disputed factual propositions must be central to adjudicating the rights and liabilities of litigants. As an initial matter, a society might adopt an “inquisitorial” system, under which a
(read more about Constitutional law entries here).

Some Constitutional Law Popular Entries

• Constitutional Law Outline
• Constitutional Law Outline (United States)
• Constitutional Lawyer
• Constitutional Law of India
• Constitutional Law Definition
• Constitutional Law Cases
• Constitutional Law Cases (United States)

Evidence

Leading Case Law

Among the main judicial decisions on this topic:

Kumho Tire Co., Ltd. v. Carmichael

Information about this important court opinion is available in this American legal Encyclopedia.

References

See Also

• Jury System
• Trial Arguments

Evidence

Evidence (Hearings)

This section introduces, discusses and describes the basics of evidence. Then, cross references and a brief overview about Hearings is provided. Finally, the subject of Agency Adjudication in relation with evidence is examined. Note that a list of cross references, bibliography and other resources appears at the end of this entry.

Evidence (Presentment)

This section introduces, discusses and describes the basics of evidence. Then, cross references and a brief overview about Presentment is provided. Finally, the subject of Negotiable Instruments in relation with evidence is examined. Note that a list of cross references, bibliography and other resources appears at the end of this entry.

Evidence (Proof)

This section introduces, discusses and describes the basics of evidence. Then, cross references and a brief overview about Proof is provided. Finally, the subject of Claims in relation with evidence is examined. Note that a list of cross references, bibliography and other resources appears at the end of this entry.

Evidence (Summary Judgment)

This section introduces, discusses and describes the basics of evidence. Then, cross references and a brief overview about Summary Judgment is provided. Finally, the subject of Civil Procedure in relation with evidence is examined. Note that a list of cross references, bibliography and other resources appears at the end of this entry.

Resources

Further Reading

• Acceptable Truth (letter), Hecht, Ira H., 61: 5 (Jun.-Jul. '77, AJS Judicature)
• After further review: A new wave of innocence commissions, Gould, Jon B., 88: 126-131 (Nov.-Dec. '04, AJS Judicature)
• AJS Initial Report of the Eyewitness Identification Field Studies (brief), Mitchell, Danielle, 95: 96 (sept-oct '11, AJS Judicature)
• AJS to study eyewitness identification procedures (brief), Eckley, Timothy S., 91: 206-207 (Jan-Feb '08, AJS Judicature)
• Another “view” of fingerprint evidence, Cherry, Michael, Imwinkelreid, Edward J., and Schenk, Manfred, 94: 306-308 (may-june '11, AJS Judicature)
• Appellate courts must conduct independent research of Daubert issues to discover “junk science”, Keasler, Michael E. and Cramer, Cathy, 90: 62-64 (Sept-Oct '06, AJS Judicature)
• Appellate courts should resist the temptation to conduct their own independent research on scientific issues, Keller, Sharon and Cimics, Donald, 90: 64-65 (Sept-Oct '06, AJS Judicature)
• Applying Daubert: how well do judges understand science and scientific method?, Dobbin, Shirley A., Gatowski, Sophia I., Richardson, James T., Ginsburg, Gerald P., Merlino, Mara L., and Dahir, Veronica, 85: 244-247 (Mar.-Apr. '02, AJS Judicature)
• Are court-appointed experts the solution to the problems of expert testimony?, Champagne, Anthony, Easterling, Danny, Shuman, Daniel W., Tomkins, Alan J., and Whitaker, Elizabeth, 84: 178-183 (Jan.-Feb. '01, AJS Judicature)
• At what price will we obtain confessions?, Kaci, Judy Hails and Rush, George E., 71: 254-258 (Feb.-Mar. '88, AJS Judicature)
• California Defendants Need Not Name Witnesses Before Trial (news), Author, No, 60: 405 (Mar. '77, AJS Judicature)
• Can Judges Evaluate Social Science Evidence? (query), Handberg, Roger,, Jr., 60: 362-363 (Mar. '77, AJS Judicature)
• Can jury trial innovations improve juror understanding of DNA evidence?, Dann, B, Michael, Hans, Valerie P., and Kaye, David H., 90: 152-156 (Jan-Feb '07, AJS Judicature)
• Causes and consequences of wrongful convictions: an essay review (review essay), Bedau, Hugo Adam, 86: 115-119 (Sept.-Oct. '02, AJS Judicature)
• A cautionary note about fingerprint analysis and reliance on digital technology, Cherry, Michael and Imwinkelried, Edward, 89: 334-338 (May-June '06, AJS Judicature)
• The changing nature of psychological expert testimony in child custody cases, Wah, Carolyn R., 86: 152-161 (Nov.-Dec. '02, AJS Judicature)
• Close encounters of the first kind, Sullivan, Thomas P., 87: 166-167, 191 (Jan.-Feb. '04, AJS Judicature)
• Complex scientific evidence and the jury, Myers, Robert D., Reinstein, Ronald S., and Griller, Gordon M., 83: 150-156 (Nov.-Dec. '99, AJS Judicature)
• Conference Considers Changes in Court Handling of Child Abuse Cases (focus), Weisberg, Lynn, 71: 169-170 (Oct.-Nov. '87, AJS Judicature)
• Courts Question Admissibility of Hypnotically Enhanced Testimony (focus), Abrahams, Steven, 66: 323-324 (Feb. '83, AJS Judicature)
• Curbing abuse of the grand jury, Lefcourt, Gerald B., 81: 196-197 (Mar.-Apr. '98, AJS Judicature)
• The danger of exposure to the Internet (viewpoint), Cherry, Michael and Imwinkelried, Edward, 91: 57-59 (Sep-Oct '07, AJS Judicature)
• Daubert And The Need For Judicial Scientific Literacy, Miller, Paul S., Rein, Bert W., and Bailey, Edwin O., 77: 254-260 (Mar.-Apr. '94, AJS Judicature)
• DNA Matches and Statistics: Important Questions, Surprising Answers, Koehler, Jonathan J., 76: 222-229 (Feb.-Mar. '93, AJS Judicature)
• DOJ interactive training tool on principles of forensic DNA (brief), Eckley, Timothy S., 89: 350-1 (May-June '06, AJS Judicature)
• Equal protection after Bush v. Gore (viewpoint), Saks, Michael J., 85: 8, 42-43 (July-Aug. '01, AJS Judicature)
• Expert Witnesses in the Courts: An Empirical Examination, Champagne, Anthony, Shuman, Daniel W., and Whitaker, Elizabeth, 76: 5-10 (Jun.-Jul. '92, AJS Judicature)
• The Facts About DNA Typing (letter), Hicks, John W., 77: 5, 55 (Jul.-Aug. '93, AJS Judicature)
• The failure of forensic science reform in Arizona (viewpoint), Hammond, Larry A., 93: 227-230 (6, AJS Judicature)
• The failure of forensic science reform in Arizona (viewpoint), Hammond, Larry A., 93: 227-230 (6, AJS Judicature)
• Fallibility of automated biometric recognition technologies (brief), Richert, David, 94:
  141 (Nov-Dec '10, AJS Judicature)
• Federal Report and Court Rulings Intensify DNA Evidence Debate (focus), Pilchen, Ira, 76: 41-42 (Jun.-Jul. '92, AJS Judicature)
• Forensic psychiatric diagnosis unmasked, Greenberg, Stuart A., Shuman, Daniel W., and Meyer, Robert G., 88: 210-215 (Mar.-Apr. '05, AJS Judicature)
• The Fourth Amendment Past and Future (letter), Harris, Daniel M., 68: 37-41 (Jun.-Jul. '84, AJS Judicature)
• From crime scene to courtroom: integrating DNA technology into the criminal justice system, Asplen, Christopher H., 83: 144-149 (Nov.-Dec. '99, AJS Judicature)
• Genes and Justice: Foreword, Abrahamson, Shirley S., 83: 102 (Nov.-Dec. '99, AJS Judicature)
• Genes and Justice: Introduction (introduction), Casey, Denise K., 83: 103-104 (Nov.-Dec. '99, AJS Judicature)
• Genes, dreams, and reality: the promises and risks of the new genetics, Casey, Denise K., 83: 105-111 (Nov.-Dec. '99, AJS Judicature)
• German Appellate Judges: Career Patterns and American-English Comparisons, Meador, Daniel J., 67: 16-27 (Jun.-Jul. '83, AJS Judicature)
• How emotion affects the trial process, Miller, Monica K., Greene, Edie, Dietrich, Hannah, Chamberlain, Jared, and Singer, Julie A., 92: 56-64 (2, AJS Judicature)
• How we can improve the reliability of fingerprint identification, Cherry, Michael and Imwinkelried, Edward, 90: 55-57 (Sept-Oct '06, AJS Judicature)
• Illustrated jury instructions, Dattu, Firoz, 82: 79-83, 93 (Sept.-Oct. '98, AJS Judicature)
• The impact of behavioral genetics on the law and the courts, Rothstein, Mark A., 83: 116-123 (Nov.-Dec. '99, AJS Judicature)
• Increasing juror participation in trials through note taking and question asking, Heuer, Larry and Penrod, Steven, 79: 256-262 (Mar.-Apr. '96, AJS Judicature)
• Independent research on scientific issues by judges must be carefully weighed and considered, Marlow, George D., 90: 66-67 (Sept-Oct '06, AJS Judicature)
• Initial report of the Eyewitness Indentification Field Studies (brief), Mitchell, Danielle, 95: 48 (July-Aug '11, AJS Judicature)
• The Innocence Protection Act (focus), Loge, Peter, 86: 121 (Sept.-Oct. '02, AJS Judicature)
• The interdependence of science and law, Breyer, Stephen, 82: 24-27 (July-Aug. '98, AJS Judicature)
• Is the grand jury worth keeping?, Brenner, Susan W., 81: 190-191, 193-195, 198-199 (Mar.-Apr. '98, AJS Judicature)
• John Hicks Responds (letter), Hicks, John W., 77: 57-58 (Jul.-Aug. '93, AJS Judicature)
• Judges and epidemiological evidence (focus), Richardson, James T., Ginsburg, Gerald P., Dobbin, Shirley A., Gatowski, Sophia I., Dahir, Veronica, and Merlino, Mara L., 87: 38-39 (July-Aug. '03, AJS Judicature)
• Keeping the gate: the evolving role of the judiciary in admitting scientific evidence, Walsh, Joseph T., 83: 140-143 (Nov.-Dec. '99, AJS Judicature)
• The lack of statistics and distortion can weaken fingerprint accuracy (focus), Cherry, Michael, Imwinkelried, Edward, and Schenk, Manfred, 93: 254-255 (6, AJS Judicature)
• Law And Science (letter), Kaye, D.H., 77: 175 (Nov.-Dec. '93, AJS Judicature)
• Leave no innocent behind (editorial), Editorial, AJS, 87: 156, 188 (Jan.-Feb. '04, AJS Judicature)
• The legal system's use of epidemiology, Bryant, Arthur H. and Reinert, Alexander A., 87: 12-21 (July-Aug. '03, AJS Judicature)
• The legal system's use of epidemiology: Some clarification, Korzeniewski, Steven James, 88: 137-139, 144 (Nov.-Dec. '04, AJS Judicature)
• The Liability of Junk and the Junk of Liability: Evidentiary Misdeeds in the Courts (review essay), Sperlich, Peter W., 75: 273-275, 281 (Feb.-Mar. '92, AJS Judicature)
• Miscarriage of justice: a cop's view, Olson, Robert K., 86: 74-77 (July-Aug. '02, AJS Judicature)
• Mr. Harris Replies (letter), Harris, Daniel M., 68: 56-57 (Aug.-Sep. '84, AJS Judicature)
• The National Conference of State Trial Judges: Celebrating 50 Golden Years, planning for the next 50 (focus), Domitrovich, Stephanie and Saks, Michael J., 92: 331-333 (6, AJS Judicature)
• The need for expedited DNA analysis (editorial), Editorial, AJS, 82: 248 (May-June '99, AJS Judicature)
• North Carolina approves new lineup, recording procedures (brief), Richert, David, 91: 42 (Jul-Aug '07, AJS Judicature)
• Of Limited Applicability? (letter), Howard, Samuel F., Jr., 68: 56 (Aug.-Sep. '84, AJS Judicature)
• Oh “Enhanced” Testimony (letter), Hansen, Richard F., 67: 4 (Jun.-Jul. '83, AJS Judicature)
• The past and future of forensic science and the courts,, Saks, Michael J., 93: 94-101 (3, AJS Judicature)
• Police experiences with recording custodial interrogations, Sullivan, Thomas P., 88: 132-136 (Nov.-Dec. '04, AJS Judicature)
• Preventing wrongful convictions (brief), Richert, David, 94: 313 (may-june '11, AJS Judicature)
• Preventing wrongful convictions (brief), Sullivan, Thomas P., 86: 106-109, 120 (Sept.-Oct. '02, AJS Judicature)
• The problems of applying Daubert to psychological syndrome evidence, Richardson, James T., Ginsburg, Gerald P., Gatowski, Sophia I., and Dobbin, Shirley A., 79: 10-16 (July-Aug. '95, AJS Judicature)
• Professor Koehler Responds (letter), Koehler, Jonathan J., 77: 55-57 (Jul.-Aug. '93, AJS Judicature)
• The prosecutorial mandate: see that justice is done, Earle, Ronald and Case, Carl Bryan, Jr., 86: 69-73 (July-Aug. '02, AJS Judicature)
• The puzzle of memory: Reflections on the divergence of truth and accuracy (viewpoint), Wallace, Steven, 93: 50-51, 84 (2, AJS Judicature)
• Questions about the accuracy of fingerprint evidence, Cherry, Michael and Imwinkelried, Edward, 92: 158-159 (4, AJS Judicature)
• Regional DNA Academy graduates first class (brief), Eckley, Timothy S., 89: 235 (Jan.-Feb. '06, AJS Judicature)
• Rethinking reliance on eyewitness confidence, Vidmar, Neil, Coleman, James E., Jr., and Newman, Theresa A., 94: 16-19 (July-Aug '10, AJS Judicature)
• Rethinking the rules of evidentiary admissibility in non-jury trials, Sheldon, John and Murray, Peter, 86: 227-231 (Mar.-Apr. '03, AJS Judicature)
• Rethinking the rules of evidentiary admissibility in non-jury trials: another view (viewpoint), Hendrix, Danna and Slayton, Dan, 87: 51-53, 88 (Sept.-Oct. '03, AJS Judicature)
• Sandwich indictments unlikely (letter), Burrell, Bob, 81: 232 (May-June '98, AJS Judicature)
• Science education for judges: What, where, and by whom? (focus), Merlino, Mara L., Dillehay, Ronald C., Dahir, Veronica, and Maxwell, Dionne, 86: 210-213 (Jan.-Feb. '03, AJS Judicature)
• Science vs. justice (letter), Cousins, William J., 83: 5, 38 (July-Aug. '99, AJS Judicature)
• Scrutinizing expert testimony (brief), Richert, David, 84: 156 (Nov.-Dec. '00, AJS Judicature)
• A second chance for justice: Illinois' post-trial forensic testing law, O'Reilly, Gregory W., 81: 114-117 (Nov.-Dec. '97, AJS Judicature)
• Setting forensic science on a new path (editorial), No, Author, 92: 188, 249 (5, AJS Judicature)
• Should judges do independent research on scientific issues?, Cheng, Edward K., 90: 58-61 (Sept-Oct '06, AJS Judicature)
• State courts look ahead (focus), Stanik, Kristine, 83: 86, 92 (Sept.-Oct. '99, AJS Judicature)
• Systemic flaws in our criminal justice system (editorial), Editorial, AJS, 89: 244, 246 (Mar.-Apr. '06, AJS Judicature)
• Updated reference manual on scientific evidence for judges is released (brief), Harris, Bonnie, 95: 141 (Nov.-Dec. '11, AJS Judicature)
• The Use And Misuse Of Expert Evidence In The Courts (panel discussion), Discussion, Panel, 77: 68-76 (Sep.-Oct. '93, AJS Judicature)
• The Use of Court-Appointed Experts in Federal Courts, Cecil, Joe S. and Willging, Thomas E., 78: 41
  -46 (Jul.-Aug. '94, AJS Judicature)
• Video evidence and summary judgment: The procedure of Scott v. Harris, Wasserman, Howard M., 91: 180-184 (Jan-Feb '08, AJS Judicature)
• Videotape transcripts (letter), Akenhead, Vicki, 82: 154 (Jan.-Feb. '99, AJS Judicature)
• Videotaped trial transcripts (letter), Burrage, Jeanette, 82: 106 (Nov.-Dec. '98, AJS Judicature)
• Videotaped trial transcripts for juror deliberations, Hartmus, Diane M. and Levine, James P., 82: 84-87, 96 (Sept.-Oct. '98, AJS Judicature)
• Virginia's answer to Daubert's question behind the question, Kesley, D. Arthur, 90: 68-71 (Sept-Oct '06, AJS Judicature)
• What Can the American Adversary System Learn from an Inquisitorial System of Justice? (query), Strier, Franklin, 76: 109-111, 161-162 (Oct.-Nov. '92, AJS Judicature)
• What Judges Should Know About The Sociology Of Science, Jasanoff, Shelia, 77: 77-82 (Sep.-Oct. '93, AJS Judicature)
• What's ahead for courts? (brief), Richert, David, 84: 217 (Jan.-Feb. '01, AJS Judicature)
• What's Old and What's New About the Insanity Plea (review essay), Milner, Neal, 67: 499-509 (May '84, AJS Judicature)
• Worthwhile DNA Questions (letter), Thompson, William C., 77: 57 (Jul.-Aug. '93, AJS Judicature)

• Resources

  See Also

• Legal Topics.

Freedom of the Press.

Attorney-Client Privilege; Best Evidence; Character Evidence; Circumstantial Evidence; Cumulative Evidence; Derivative Evidence; Direct Evidence; DNA Evidence; Documentary Evidence; Exclusionary Rule; Extrinsic Evidence; Forensic Science; Parol Evidence; Privileged Communication; Polygraph.

Analytical instrumentation; Animal evidence; Anthropology; Anthropometry; Artificial fibers; Autopsy; Ballistic fingerprints; Bloodstain evidence; Bite analysis; Crime scene investigation; Crime scene reconstruction; CODIS: Combined DNA Index System; Death, cause of; Decomposition; DNA fingerprint; Entomology; Exhumation; Fingerprint; Hair analysis; Impression evidence; Pathology; Trace evidence.

verdict.

Further Reading (Books)

Among the many modern treatises on the law of evidence those of J. H. Wigmore are often accorded the highest authority. See also studies by M. J. Saks and R. Van Duizend (1983); P. Achinstein (1984); I. Younger and M. Goldsmith (1984); J. H. Friedenthal and M. Singer (1985).

Further Reading (Books 2)

Barrett, W. F. On the Threshold of a New World. London: Kegan Paul, 1908. Revised as On the Threshold of the Unseen: An Examination of the Phenomena of Spiritualism and of the Evidence for Survival After Death. New York: E. P. Dutton, 1971.

Dingwall, Eric J., and John Langdon-Davies. The Unknown-Is It Nearer? New York: New American Library, 1956.

Ducasse, C. J. Paranormal Phenomena, Science, and Life After Death. New York: Parapsychology Foundation, 1969.

Garrett, Eileen J. My Life As a Search for the Meaning of Mediumship. London: Rider, 1939. Reprint, New York: Arno Press, 1975.

Heywood, Rosalind. ESP: A Personal Memoir. London: Chat-to & Windus, 1964. Reprint, New York: E. P. Dutton, 1964.

Leonard, Gladys Osborne. My Life in Two Worlds. London: Cassell, 1931.

Marbewick, Betty. “The Soal-Goldney Experiments with Basil Shackleton: New Evidence of Data Manipulation.” Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research 56, no. 211 (May 1978).

Murchison, Carl A., ed. The Case For and Against Psychical Belief. Worcester, Mass.: Clark University, 1927. Reprint, New York: Arno Press, 1975.

Neff, H. Richard. Psychic Phenomena and Religion: ESP, Prayer, Healing, Survival. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1971.

Podmore, Frank. Studies in Psychical Research. New York: G. P. Putnam’s and Son, 1897. Reprint, New York: Arno Press, 1975.

Prince, Walter Franklin. The Enchanted Boundary: Being a Survey of Negative Reactions to Claims of Psychic Phenomena, 1820-1930. Boston, Mass.: Boston Society for Psychic Re-search, 1930. Reprint, New York: Arno Press, 1975.

Rao, K. Ramakrishna. Experimental Parapsychology: A Review and Interpretation. Springfield, Ill.: Thomas, 1966.

Rhine, Louisa E. Mind Over Matter: Psychokinesis. New York: Macmillan, 1970. Reprint, New York: Collier, 1972.

Smythies, J. R., ed. Science and ESP. New York: Humanities Press, 1967.

Tuckett, Ivor L. The Evidence for the Supernatural. London, 1911.

Tyrrell, G. N. M. Science and Psychical Phenomena. New York: Harper, 1938. Reprint, New York: Arno Press, 1975.

Further Reading (Articles)

Evidence: Police Departments’ Crucial Liability, Tribune-Review/Pittsburgh Tribune-Review; September 9, 2010; Zapf, Karen

Evidence Makes the Case, Security Management; September 1, 1989; Denes, Richard F.

All evidence must be admissible and relevant; Part 7 of a series on substantive fairness in dismissals deals with irrelevant evidence.(Workplace), The Star (South Africa); September 10, 2008

Persuasive Evidence in India: An Investigation of the Impact of Evidence Types and Evidence Quality, Argumentation and Advocacy; March 22, 2011; Hornikx, Jos de Best, Judith

Evidence-based practice: by reading this article and writing a practice profile, you can gain ten continuing education points (CEPs). You have up to a year to send in your practice profile. Guidelines on how to write and submit a profile are featured at the end of this article. (Continuing professional development: clinical development). Nursing Standard; December 18, 2002; Hewitt-Taylor, Jaqui

Evidence standards and the 2009 manual.(TRAVERSING THE LAW), Point of Beginning; December 1, 2011; Lucas, Jeffery N.

Evidence-Based Decision-Making: Practical Issues in the Appraisal of Evidence to Inform Policy and Practice, Australian Health Review; November 1, 2010; Carter, Bronwyn J.

Evidence-Based Practices in Health Care: Social Work Possibilities, Health and Social Work; November 1, 2004; Zlotnik, Joan Levy Galambos, Colleen

Evidence. (audit evidence)(includes guidance on audit evidence), Internal Auditor; August 1, 1998; Ratliff, Richard L. Johnson, I. Richard

Evidence Tracking Streamlined, Law & Order; October 1, 1999

Evidence, Gale Encyclopedia of Everyday Law; January 1, 2006

Evidence Collection and Alternatives to “Discovery” in P.R.C. Litigation. Mondaq Business Briefing; April 17, 2011

Evidence of lean: adding value to the forensic stream in criminal investigation. Industrial Engineer; December 1, 2004; Ahluwalia, Rashpal S. Srinivasan, Arunshankar

Character evidence: Getting to the root of the problem through comparison, American Journal of Criminal Law; April 1, 1997; James Landon

Advancing Evidence-Based Nurse Anesthesia Practice, AANA Journal; August 1, 2010; Thiemann, Lisa J

Weighing the Evidence, HERD : Health Environments Research & Design Journal; July 1, 2010; Stichler, Jaynelle F.

Spoliation of evidence–a primer, Federation of Insurance & Corporate Counsel Quarterly; October 1, 1997; Sachs, Rebecca Levy Trembly, Lisa J

Using Evidence to Influence Health Policy, Research and Theory for Nursing Practice; October 1, 2013; Moosvi, Karen Levin, Rona F.

Evidence-Based Medicine and the Search for a Science of Clinical Care, Health Sociology Review; October 1, 2007; Timmermans, Stefan

Evidence Controls Absent in State, Tribune-Review/Pittsburgh Tribune-Review; June 8, 2013; Bobkerlik

Introduction to Evidence

Evidence

Leading Case Law

Among the main judicial decisions on this topic:

Kumho Tire Co., Ltd. v. Carmichael

Information about this important court opinion is available in this American legal Encyclopedia.

References

See Also

• Jury System
• Trial Arguments

Resources

Notes and References

• Information about Evidence in the Encarta Online Encyclopedia

Guide to Evidence

In this Section

Evidence Law, Burden of Proof, Admissibility, Evidence Law Relevance, Hearsay, Witnesses and Evidence Privileges.

Evidence in State Statute Topics

Introduction to Evidence (State statute topic)

The purpose of Evidence is to provide a broad appreciation of the Evidence legal topic. Select from the list of U.S. legal topics for information (other than Evidence).

Evidence

Leading Case Law

Among the main judicial decisions on this topic:

Kumho Tire Co., Ltd. v. Carmichael

Information about this important court opinion is available in this American legal Encyclopedia.

References

See Also

• Jury System
• Trial Arguments

Resources

Further Reading

• Information about Evidence in the Gale Encyclopedia of American Law.

Evidence meaning

Those objects or statements which tend to prove or disprove the elements of a claim. The things presented in court for the purpose of proof of matters there asserted.

Taylor v. Howard, lll R.I. 527, 304 A.2d 891, 893.

Testimony, documents, photographs, maps and video tapes are all examples of evidence.

Evidence Meaning in Law Enforcement

Testimony of witnesses, documents, and exhibits as presented to the grand jury by an attorney for the government or otherwise properly brought before it. In some instances, the person under investigation may also testify.

Evidence in the context of Juvenile and Family Law

Definition ofEvidence published by the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges:Generally, any sort of proof put forth during a trial for the purpose of influencing the judgment.

Evidence in the Criminal Justice System

Evidence Definition in the context of the Federal Court System

Physical material or information presented in testimony or in documents that is used to persuade the fact finder (judge or jury) to decide the case in favor of one side or the other. The federal courts must follow the Federal Rules of Evidence.