What Is Evidence in a Criminal Case?
What is Evidence in Criminal Law? Evidence is any testimony, object, or document which is presented in a court of law to prove or disprove an assertion in the case. Evidence is crucial to the criminal justice process because it is what determines whether a person will be convicted or acquitted of the crime for which they were accused. All types of evidence have to go through the same legal process before they are allowed to be used at trial. The five types of evidence are testimonial, demonstrative, documentary, real, and physical or forensics evidence. Testimonial evidence is factual information that the witness either heard or experienced firsthand. They will recount the facts as they know them and are often confused with demonstrative evidence. Demonstrative evidence is when the witness uses slides or other props to help the jury understand what they witnessed. Demonstrative evidence is used to give a visual representation of what happened. Physical evidence is any kind of observable evidence , such as fingerprints, blood, hair, and so on. Some pieces of physical evidence can be presented as real evidence, which are the physical objects themselves and which the jury can examine. While these are typically the same, there are two distinctions: real evidence is moving, while physical evidence is static. An example of real evidence would be a murder weapon, which may be shown to the jury during the trial. In this example, the real evidence is the weapon which is usable in the physical evidence form. Finally, document or documentary evidence is any kind of physical document or data that can be reviewed and used by the court to prove or disprove the case.
Tangible Evidence
Physical evidence is the tangible proof that often forms the basis for a law enforcement agency’s belief that a crime has occurred. Many times this evidence opens the door to the legal system for law enforcement to investigate so that the case can be solved. Physical evidence can be anything from fingerprints or blood pools to more sophisticated fingerprint analysis and DNA tests. For example, in a simple theft for instance, if a thief broke into a person’s house and stole his coin collection, the police could look for physical evidence in the form of fingerprints on the window that was opened to gain entry. Sometime later the police may pull a suspect’s fingerprints and conduct a fingerprint search against the prints lift by the officer. If the two prints match the officer has physical evidence pointing toward a certain suspect. Take a more hardened crime in which a murder is committed. The victim’s body is found and obvious signs point toward foul play. One form of physical evidence in a murder investigation might be a gun that was discovered in the immediate area near where the body was found. That weapon along with all of its bullets can constitute important evidence pointing to the suspect if it is determined to have a certain made, model and serial number for example that precisely identify the weapon as belonging to the suspect. And upon fingerprint testing, a suspect’s fingerprints may reveal yet another physical connection to the crime. In the above cases physical evidence can be the basis for a warrant for arrest or a warrant to conduct a search. It would be difficult to obtain such an order without that tangible evidence pointing to the suspect of person of interest.
Witness Testimony
Yet another crucial type of evidence is testimonial evidence, or witness statements. This includes any and all verbal statements made by witnesses to the crime as well as expert statements by industry professionals. Testimonial evidence is an absolutely essential component to proving the liability of the negligent party.
In many cases, witness statements are imperative to providing a framework for the events as they occurred. While physical evidence can paint a picture of what in fact happened, it is often up to witness statements to explain how the event happened. Because physical evidence is often difficult to come by, witness statements are very important pieces of the puzzle in criminal law.
Not only do witness statements provide what non-neutral parties believe happened, they can also provide evidence that is used to catch an accused party in a lie. For example, if a couple witnesses a car accident and they both independently provide a very similar account of what happened, they can help the court make a determination of what actually occurred based on their statements. On the other hand, if those two witnesses give different or contradictory accounts, their statements can help determine who is being dishonest.
When it comes to witness statements in criminal law, it is very important to understand the concept of reliability. Reputability is about the witness himself, while reliability has to do with the statement itself. In some cases, there may be no reason to believe the witness is credible at all, yet the statement itself was honestly given. This is obvious in cases where an eyewitness is able to identify a perpetrator from a line-up of people who look very similar to one another.
On the other hand, the statement itself may be considered totally unreliable. In some cases, witnesses may even be lying to protect or distract from the accused party or otherwise distort the truth to serve their own purposes. This is just one of the reasons why it is important to have an experienced criminal law attorney on your side when facing any criminal charge. Your attorney can investigate all claims and present the best possible case to the court on your behalf.
Documentary Evidence
Documentary evidence refers to evidence contained within written records. Contracts, emails, titles and bills of sale, for example, are all considered documentary evidence. In criminal law, these documents can be used as a means of proving or disproving a fact in question. When a document is offered as evidence, it is known as an "exhibit." In addition to these forms of evidence, photographs and video recordings can also be used to help prove or disprove a case. With the rise of technology, these forms of evidence are becoming more and more widely used in criminal law cases. The admissibility of documentary evidence is determined "based upon relevancy, foundation and the potential for prejudice." In other words, the document should relate to the facts of the case at hand, be authentic and be free from any improper suggestion before being admitted as documentary evidence. If a judge determines that the document will not help to prove any relevant facts in the case, it may not be admitted as a piece of evidence.
Electronic Evidence
The last two decades have seen a dramatic rise in the amount of digital evidence available to law enforcement in criminal cases. Information gathered from computers, phones, and social media interactions provides a significant amount of useful information for police, prosecutors, and attorneys in criminal defense. Technology plays a huge role in today’s world, so it is no surprise that it can come into play in legal cases. Law enforcement officials rely on data from digital devices for many aspects of their investigations, including looking for evidence of crimes, communicating with victims and witnesses, and reviewing alibis.
Any time a criminal act is committed, there is a possibility for digital evidence to be found. Whether it is a digital photo sent over email or text message, a deleted social media post, or a recorded private phone call, almost every modern crime leaves behind some form of digital fingerprint. Since so much of our lives is lived online or stored digitally in some way, it makes sense that these digital traces are ending up being used as evidence for investigations.
The collection, handling, and preservation of digital evidence is similar to physical evidence in many ways. However, there are some factors that are more unique to the digital evidence field. If not handled properly, digital evidence can become compromised and therefore more or less meaningless in a court of law. For that reason, it is important that all people involved in getting and using digital evidence understand how to properly deal with it throughout its lifecycle. Digital evidence may be collected by an Internet Service Provider or other third party, such as a social media site, that has access to digital communication that is sent over their network.
Once a complaint of a crime comes to the police, officers begin taking steps to investigate and gather evidence . The collection phase of a criminal case is generally not public, so it is not uncommon for individuals to be unaware that they are being investigated for a possible crime. The collection of digital evidence typically occurs in two different ways: law enforcement monitors online activity that indicates a crime occurred digitally and physical digital storage devices and communications are seized for further analysis. Police searches of digital devices are like regular property searches in many ways, but it is also possible for digital information to be accessed remotely, such as in instances where a suspect’s computer or phone is left logged into an account. Seizing a physical device for analysis is usually done through a warrant approved by a judge, as digital data stored on the device is legally considered to belong to the user of the device. If a warrant is received, law enforcement can take the device into custody for further analysis.
In order to preserve digital evidence, it is crucial that law enforcement collects it properly and does not make any changes to the files on the device. A good example of this is in the case of a cellphone-if push notifications alert will almost instantly wipe the entire device if the wrong button is pressed. Furthermore, reputable law enforcement agencies often employ advanced forensic computer and phone analysis tools that allow them to capture a digital image of the entire drive of a computer or the data on a cellphone. This also prevents any changes to the data.
The handling phase of digital evidence is often the most critical element of the evidence lifecycle, especially equipment and software used for analysis. This process is often conducted in a laboratory setting that is protected against access by other people.
Circumstantial Evidence
Unlike the other evidentiary elements mentioned, circumstantial evidence at times involves the "tool" of inference. Evidence that is circumstantial involves facts that infer other facts instead of leaving no doubt as to whether a proposition is true or false. If the police can establish causal connection between a suspect and the commission of a crime on circumstantial evidence alone, then a judge or jury can presume those facts as true. A classic example of circumstantial evidence is smoking gun residue found on a handgun with a shooting in close proximity. The police must put together circumstances – facts that infer other facts – to make sure the gun owner knew the gun was close by and was there at the time of the shooting. Other examples of circumstantial evidence are the fingerprints of a suspect found at the scene of a crime or blood stains of a victim found in the trunk of a car owned by a suspect. Inferences arise from these facts – a suspect uses the gun and then wipes away any fingerprint evidence afterwards, a suspect carries a bloody body to another spot before disposing of it. These inferences are what allows a judge or jury to draw conclusions from these circumstantial evidence facts.
The word "inference" itself is a word that provides considerable latitude, particularly in the detectives and investigators field of criminal law. It is not even unusual for two detectives at opposite ends of the country to infer two very different conclusions on the same set of circumstances (see "a set of facts can be viewed differently by different individuals"). That is the nature of culpability itself – how does one know the extent of involvement of a particular suspect when everyone involved has a different view on the circumstances? It’s a given that the prosecutor may only support his or her theory of the crime, one that usually makes his or her inferencing much easier to sell to a judge or jury, by leaving out any exculpatory information such as a different version of the facts. Suspects, witnesses and offenders usually see the circumstances through their own unique viewpoints.
These circumstances would make it virtually impossible to charge someone with a criminal offense if a prosecutor, police and other law enforcement agencies were not allowed to use circumstantial evidence to determine the conduct of a suspect. In some cases (human trafficking for example), it can be difficult to prove that an individual has committed a crime unless the authorities are permitted to use circumstantial evidence to piece together the facts. In effect, this type of evidence provides a tool to the authorities, one which sometimes makes the difference between culpability and freedom.
Admissibility of Evidence
Evidence is subjected to the rules of admissibility, which are generally consistent from one state to another. States, however, have the option to augment the rules found in the Federal Rules of Evidence. While the determination that a particular item of evidence can be offered by a lawyer usually falls to the judge, a lawyer must still be prepared to argue the admissibility of any particular piece of evidence. Judges make admissibility decisions that are generally considered to be correct. Many state and federal court decisions, in fact, are turned on the decision of one judge in a case to admit or exclude a piece of evidence. For example, objections to hearsay, the written statements of the witnesses for a trial not required to testify at a trial, is one of the most common objections made by lawyers. The exact definition of hearsay and what is considered a witness statement can differ from one type of case to another, as well as from one state to another. Whether or not a particular piece of evidence is classified as hearsay might make or break a case. Even where hearsay is not the issue, lawyers can be met with different forms of evidence being excluded as irrelevant, prejudicial or unduly inflammatory, meaning that the fact in question may be legally important for a determination of the case but, when presented, could lead to undue prejudice against the defendant. In some cases, such as a colleague testifying about a witness being generally careless in their actions, the statement can be classified as testimony regarding the character of the witness in general, which could be seen as unfairly prejudicial. In other cases, an attorney might want to present Congress statements or transcripts, which can be classified as hearsay, even though they can be fair and accurate representations. Another challenge a lawyer might face is the opposite to hearsay when the prosecution puts forth oral statements and their witness testimony, which can be out of character for those who know them, and can cause an attorney to get an undue conviction against a defendant. Ultimately, evidence can be challenged based on its classification as hearsay or not, or how prejudicial, inflammatory and legally relevant the material presented to a trial judge.
How Evidence Affects a Verdict
The type of evidence presented at trial not only informs the jury or judge about what they should or should not conclude from the evidence, but also assists them in deciding if the law calls for them to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt or not guilty or not guilty by reason of insanity or mental disease or defect. The burden of proof remains on the trial prosecutor to persuade the trier of fact that offences have been committed. Depending on the type of evidence produced at trial, such as direct, circumstantial, real or demonstrative, and the quantum and quality and reliability of the evidence, either the jury or the judge may find themselves under pressure of reasonable doubt when they deliberate the findings. The jury must come to a unanimous decision, and if the findings are negative, the accused is avowedly not guilty but if the court finds him or her guilty or not criminally responsible, then the summary conviction or indictable offence provisions will apply to the punishment that will be handed down. The quality of the evidence produced, its trustworthiness and dependability , may be extremely persuasive for the jury’s or judge’s consideration in reaching his or her verdict. The impact of the evidence that has been led during the trial can be quite significant on the verdict. It may have high impact on a finding of guilt or acquittal, and directly related decisions are made accordingly which have a foothold on the ultimate decision. The admission of evidence and consequent rulings made, can lead to an unsafe verdict either way. If the evidence has been unduly prejudicial or unreliable or not properly admissible, this could result in a quashing of the conviction. A dangerous verdict is one that would be overturned or would not be supported on appeal or leave to appeal is granted by the Court of Appeal for the province or the Supreme Court of Canada to address the substantive and/or procedural miscarriage of justice issue. The appellate court may direct an acquittal based on such errors. Leading and defending different forms of evidence through strategic presentation is the nature of a lawyer’s duty to his/her client in the law of criminal procedure. The law itself cautions against irreparable harm being done to an accused person through unsafe, unreliable or unworthy court process.
