Question 1
Discuss whether or not the criminal justice system could operate without the existence of privileges to evidence. Within this answer discuss why privileges exist and argue for or against the end for privileges and society’s interest in these rules of evidence. Discuss a minimum of two different privileges within your answer.
Question 2
Discuss the use of presumptions as evidence to meet the burden of proof in a criminal case as discussed in County Court of Ulster v. Allen, 442 U.S. 140, 1979. Discuss whether or not presumptions should be allowed as evidence to convict someone of a crime as a societal standard.
Question 3
Discuss the concept of judicial notice. Use at least three case examples of how judicial notice operates and what are the boundaries of what can and cannot be judicially noticed. Include in your answer why judicial notice is needed for effective operation of the court system.
Evidence
Abstract
Evidence is vital in any criminal or civil proceedings to enable courts to find fair, just and equal judicial positions on different matters. In this regard, the court needs to differentiate the different forms of evidence and procedures of getting and admitting them to consider. It is vital to note that evidence is not readily available, and thus the courts need to consider the privileges of evidence, presumption evidence and justice notices. The three components of evidence need to be handled effectively and correctly to ensure that they provide the relevant contribution in the decisions made in courts of law based on the evidence provided.
Question 1
Privileges to evidence are an important aspect in the criminal justice system to ensure that the plaintiff and defendant’s well-being is not affected by achieving the highest levels of justice, fairness and equality. The privilege of evidence entails a rule of evidence enabling the holder of the privilege to refuse to reveal information or give evidence on a certain aspect or bar certain evidence from being disclosed or used in criminal justice proceedings (Murphy, 2019). Privilege information can be communication made verbally or in the form of writing, and it must be confidential since revealing such information could negatively affect parties to the court cases, even in matters that are beyond the cases; thus, such communication and information need to be protected by and under the law. Privilege information needs to be protected from being accessed or exposed to unauthorized parties. Privilege information is safeguarded by a confidential relationship recognized by the law, such as doctor-patient or attorney-client relationships and communication in court cases. Persons holding the privilege information need to protect it and use it in the interest of the parties concerned by the relationship’s information. The courts and the criminal justice system need to protect privilege to evidence to protect the relationship, confidentiality and integrity to the person that such evidence and information concern.
Privileges of evidence enable parties involved in criminal proceedings to effectively disclose, confide and reveal truths and facts to professionals without fear of information being released to other parties or unauthorized parties Murphy, 2019). Professionals need true and factual aspects of any case to enable them to work in their clients’ interest even though such information and evidence could be incriminating. For instance, in the case of lawyer-client privilege, as established under the evidence code sections 950, the attorney must refuse to disclose privileged evidence to protect their client in legal matters. Additionally, under this privilege, the defendant or plaintiff has a right not to disclose confidential information or prevent their lawyers from disclosing such information. This approach to evidence protection ensures that the parties’ privacy in a court case is effectively protected. Therefore, the privileges of evidence need to be incorporated in the criminal justice system to ensure that parties to a case are presented professionally in their matters to arrive at justice rulings and settlements.
The privilege of evidence is a crucial element of the law to maintain the rule of law. The privilege of evidence is a fundamental common law principle that ensures that parties in a criminal case can share confidential information to clients such that they get competent and independent legal advice from different professions such as doctors or lawyers, regarding a matter in the criminal justice process (Friend, Bergman and Taslitz, 2014). This approach ensures that a balance of power is exercised between the respective states and individuals in line with maintaining the rule of law. Therefore, the privilege of evidence instills a sense of ethical obligation to different professions regarding their clients in observing the privilege of evidence as to the rule of law.
The presence of privilege of evidence ensures that only relevant evidence is admitted in civil and criminal trials to observe high levels of confidentiality for the parties involved in a court case. Privileges evidence and communication exist in law because society has high regard and value to privacy and purposes for a certain relationship (Imwinkerlried, 2006). In this regard, information must be selectively given to ensure that the relationships’ bond remains strong. If only relevant information is provided, it ensures that information that could damage or negatively impact the parties involved are avoided and not disclosed. For instance, in the case where there are trade secrets, such evidence and information will be protected under the privilege communication. On the other hand, health condition information and evidence can be protected through psychotherapist-patient privilege to ensure their confidential health matters are safeguarded. Therefore, privileged evidence needs to be maintained in the criminal justice system to ensure that only relevant evidence is presented while confidential matters are protected in the interest of privacy, confidentiality and maintenance of relationships.
Additionally, an important aspect of the privilege of evidence is maintained where there are exceptions to it in the interest of the common good and the rule of law. In this regard, the privilege of evidence is overridden when the client threatens self-harm, harms another person, and when the attorney thinks that there is an immediate danger, the privilege is waived (Armeani, 2010). The privilege is further waived when evidence is used in the facilitation of joint criminal enterprise and fraud. This approach ensures that the attorney does not present misleading statements or cover-up in courts of law.
The privilege of evidence is a vital aspect in the criminal justice system, and thus it needs to be employed in the interests of justice, fairness and equality. In this regard, the privilege of evidence has exceptions to ensure that the protection of evidence is lawful, and it only exists to ensure relevant evidence is presented in court while protecting confidentiality and privacy in relationships.
Question 2
The presumption evidence is adopted in a court of law when an existing or non-existing fact of a matter is drawn from other evidence that is admitted and proved true. In this regard, when one fact is known as the primary fact is proved and admitted by another party, then another fact regarded as presumed fact is adopted as proved when there is no contrary evidence of the same (Walton, 2015). In the presumption evidence, the court assumes that a fact is true unless there is evidence on the contrary. For instance, a legal conclusion/ assumption can be made that a person is dead when a person disappeared, and no one has seen or made contact with them for seven years.
The presumption evidence can be evaluated and accessed from the County Court of Ulster v. Allen, 442 U.S. 140, 1979. In this case, three adult males and a sixteen-year-old girl were jointly tried to possess two loaded handguns, a machine gun and heroin. The jury convicted the defendants on account of possessing handguns but acquitted them for contents of the trunk. The male defendants argued that the girl was in possession of the guns, and they did not have anything to do with them (Walton, 2015). The defendants challenged the New York State law’s constitutionality that presumed the illegal possession when a gun was found in a car occupied by all the individuals charged. Consequently, the issue in the case was whether it was constitutional to allow the operation and admission of the presumption of illegal possession New York statute for the defendants.
The court held that the state advanced a permissive presumption that was constitutional and did not deprive defendants of the due process. In this case, there was a rational and probable connection between the case’s basic facts proved to be the prosecution and the ultimate fact presumed (Mason, 2014). In this regard, the defendants’ possession of the guns, then the ultimate fact is more likely than not follow the facts proved. The dissent on the case was that the statute compelled the jury to find facts regardless of other related evidence. The dissent argued it was dangerous to allow inference evidence. Therefore, decision relying on inference evidence needed additional evidence for their qualification and admission.
The court made a ruling that the trial judge had a limited weight of the statute. In this regard, the statute was interpreted as permissive inference rather than mandatory inference. The defendants were free to rebut the presumption, and the jury was free to reject it. Therefore, it is clear that presumption evidence can prove other aspects of the case when the primary facts are proved beyond any reasonable doubt.
Reasons against presumption evidence
Presumption evidence needs to be incorporated into the criminal justice system in convicting crimes. It has a wide range of positive impacts on attaining justice, fairness, and equality. In this regard, the presumption evidence is relied on to demonstrate knowledge or intent since evidence of a subjective state of mind tough (Scurich and John, 2017). It is important to note that there are some instances where finding and obtaining evidence is almost impossible, but some primary facts can be used to ascertain facts of a case. In the case where the courts are presented with indecisive subjects, they can rely on primary related facts evidence to ascertain and prove other related facts, thus enabling the courts to make decisions. The approach ensures that relevant evidence can be presented in a case for decision making.
The presumption evidence enables professionals in the legal field to establish empirical generalization in the interest of making judgments and taking legal positions. The empirical generalization is achieved through the development of rational connections between different subjects. The generalization in court matters is ascertained and proved when a rational connection is established between a presumed fact and proven fact, and there must be no inconsistencies and arbitrary aspects (Scurich and John, 2017). In this regard, presumption evidence enables courts to make decisions when there is no actual evidence, but certain aspects and facts can be rationally connected to some already proved facts.
Additionally, the presumption evidence is subject to the due process of the law to ensure that decisions based on it are factual with no inconsistencies in attaining justice in matters brought before the court (Scurich and John, 2017). In this regard, the defendants and their attorneys are given a chance to prove inconsistencies and conflict in relating proved facts and the presumption evidence, thus enabling the court to find the true position. In this regard, the courts make reasonable rulings by evaluating presumption evidence, subjecting it to the due process of the law and evaluating inconsistencies and conflicts in the different aspects of the cases.
Question 3
The judicial notice entails the admission of facts presented as evidence without a formal presentation of evidence since such facts are synonymous with evidence. In this regard, a fact can be introduced into evidence when the truth is well known, authoritatively attested, and there are no reasonable doubts about such an attempt (Beilin, 2003). The judicial notice is implemented when the party seeking to rely on such facts requests the court. For instance, under Federal Rule of Evidence 201, the trial court is inclined to take judicial notice of a well-known fact at the request of parties to a case when the court is given information supporting the fact. In such a case, the court has the option of adopting the judicial notice at its discretion without the request of any party. For instance, in the case of O’Toole v. Northrop Grumman Corp,
the Tenth Circuit reversed a district court’s decision on damages since the has abused its discretion by failing to adopt judicial notice indicating the actual earning history given by the defendant from internet sources. This shows that judicial notices should not be ignored but rather evaluated objectively in admitting or refusing judicial proceedings. This shows that factual judicial notices are valid at any time despite the party that applies to it. Facts qualify to be judicially noticed when they are common knowledge in the society where the court exists; the facts are capable of accurate and ready determination from a source that cannot be reasonably questioned and when the facts contain specified facts undisputed records such as records of the court. For instance, in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the judicial notice presented had to be effectively evaluated through the adoption of careful instruction, presentation of contrary evidence and vigorous cross-examination to ascertain its validity. Consequently, the judicial notice can be introduced and adopted at any stage of judicial proceedings such as hearing or trial stages.
Additionally, judicial notice is a vital component in the criminal justice system as it ensures that indisputable facts that cannot be effectively proved are accepted in courts (Hamer and Edmond, 2016). This approach ensures that facts can be used in place of evidence to prove a point or an argument in a court of law. The presentation and admission of indisputable facts in criminal or civil matters enables courts to make just decisions, and they can base the decisions on precedents.
Conclusion
There are different forms of gathering and preparation of evidence in readiness for the courts, and thus there is a need to handle the different forms in structured ways while adopting the due process of the law to ensure that evidence is factual and thus admissible. The evidence presented and accepted in courts should be disputable to ensure that the courts make just rulings. Therefore, the privilege of evidence, the presumption of evidence and judicial notices must be handled as per the law to ensure that they can be admissible in courts to enhance decision making.
References
Armeanu, O. I. (2010). The battle over privileges and pension reform: Evidence from legislative roll call analysis in Poland. Europe-Asia Studies, 62(4), 571-595.
Beilin, L. W. (2003). In Defense of Wisconsin’s Judicial Notice Rule. Wis. L. Rev., 499.
Friedland, S. I., Bergman, P., & Taslitz, A. E. (2014). Evidence Law and Practice. LexisNexis.
Hamer, D., & Edmond, G. (2016). Judicial notice: beyond adversarialism and into the exogenous zone. Griffith Law Review, 25(3), 291-318.
Imwinkelried, E. J. (2006). Draft Article V of the Federal Rules of Evidence on Privileges, One of the Most Influential Pieces of Legislation Never Enacted: The Strength of the Ingroup Loyalty of the Federal Judiciary. Ala. L. Rev., 58, 41.
Mason, S. (2014). Electronic evidence: A proposal to reform the presumption of reliability and hearsay. Computer Law & Security Review, 30(1), 80-84.
Murphy Jr, J. F. (2019). Maryland Evidence Handbook. LexisNexis.
Scurich, N., & John, R. S. (2017). Jurors’ presumption of innocence. The Journal of Legal Studies, 46(1), 187-206.
Walton, D. (2015). Presumption, Burden of Proof, and Lack of Evidence.”. L’Analisi Linguistica e Letteraria 2008-1, 16, 49-71.
