Testimonial Evidence - Law Dictionary Search Results
Home Dictionary Name: testimonial evidencetestimonial evidence
testimonial evidence see evidence ...
Frye test
Frye test [from United States v. Frye, 293 F. 1013 (1923), the case that established the rule] : a common-law rule of evidence: the results of scientific tests or procedures are admissible as evidence only when the tests or procedures have gained general acceptance in the particular field to which they belong called also Frye rule NOTE: In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993), the Supreme Court held that the Federal Rules of Evidence supersede the Frye test, and as a result scientific evidence (as expert testimony) needs to meet only the requirements of the Federal Rules of Evidence in order to be admissible. ...
Testimony
Testimony, evidence given; proof by a witness. See EVIDENCE and PERPETUATING TESTIMONY.Means an evidence that a competent witness under oath or affirmation gives at trial or in an affidavit or deposition, Black's Law Dictionary, 7th Edn., p. 1485...
Foundation
Foundation, the founding or building of a college or hospital. The word is taken in two different senses, 'fundatio incipiens' and 'fundatio perficiens'; as to the politic capacity, the act of incorporation is metaphorically called the foundation, but as to the dotation, the first gift of the revenues is called the foundation, and he who gives it is the founder in law [Sutton's Hospital case, (1613) 10 Rep 1; 1 Bl. Com. 468].The basis on which something is supported, esp. evidence or testimony that establishes the admissibility of other evidence, Black's Law Dic-tionary, 7th Edn., p. 667.The founding or building of a college or hospital. The incorporation or endowment of a college or hospital is the foundation; and he who endows it with land or other property is the founder, Black's Law Dictionary, 4th Edn. See also Director of Income Tax v. Bharat Diamond Bourse, (2003) 1 SCC 741....
aliunde rule
aliunde rule : a rule of evidence that a verdict may not be challenged by a juror's testimony without evidence from another source used primarily in Ohio ...
Larrison rule
Larrison rule, means the doctrine that a defendant may be entitled to a new trial on the basis of newly discovered evidence of false testimony by a government witness if the jury might have reached a different conclusion without the evidence and it unfairly surprised the defendant at trial, Larrison v. United States, 24 F.2d 82....
Evidence
Evidence, proof, either written or unwritten, of allegations in issue between parties.Something (including testimony, documents and tangible objects) that tends to prove or disprove the existence of an alleged fact, Black's Law Dictionary, 7th Edn., p. 575.The leading rules of evidence are the following:-(1) The sole object and end of evidence is to ascertain the truth of the several disputed facts or points in issue; and no evidence ought to be admitted which is not relevant to the issues. As to when evidence of collateral facts is admissible, see Hales v. Kerr, (1908) 2 KB 601; Butterley Co. v. New Hucknall Colliery Co., (1909) 1 Ch 37. As to acts showing a continuous course of conduct, see R. v. Mortimer, 25 Cr App Cas 150.(2) The point in issue is to be proved by the party who asserts the affirmative; according to the maxim affirmanti non neganti incumbit probatio. See BURDEN OF PROOF.(3) It will be sufficient to prove the substance of the issue.(4) The best evidence must be given ...
Circumstantial evidence
Circumstantial evidence, presumptive proof when the fact itself is not proved by direct testimony, but is to be inferred from circumstances, which either necessarily or usually attend such facts. It is obvious that a presumption is more or less likely to be true according as it is more or less probable that the circumstances would not have exited unless the fact which is inferred from them had also existed; and that a presumption can only be relied on until the contrary is actually proved. Circumstantial evidence has, in some instances, undoubtedly been found to produce a much stronger assurance of a prisoner's guilt than could have been produced by more direct and positive testimony. As a general principle, however, it is true that positive evidence of a fact from credible eye-witnesses is the most satisfactory that can be produced; and the universal feeling of mankind leans to this species of evidence in preference to that which is merely circumstantial. If positive evidence of a fac...
Fabricating false evidence
Fabricating false evidence, S. 192 (of IPC) defines compendiously the offence of fabricating false evidence. It reads thus:'Whoever causes any circumstances to exist... or makes any document containing a false statement intending that such circumstance..... or false statement may appear in evidence in a judicial proceeding..... and that such circumstance......... or false statement, so appearing in evidence, may cause any person who in such proceeding is to form an opinion upon the evidence, to entertain an erroneous opinion touching any point material to the result of such proceeding, is said to fabricate false evidence, Dr. S. Dutt v. State of U.P., AIR 1966 SC 523 (527): (1966) 1 SCR 493.Whoever causes any circumstance to exist or makes any false entry in any book or record, (or electronic record) or makes any document (or electronic record) containing a false statement, intending that such circumstance, false entry or false statement may appear in evidence in a judicial proceeding,...
Best evidence rule
Best evidence rule, is rule of evidence in order to prove what is said or pictured in a writing, recording, or photograph the original must be privileged unless the original is lost, destroyed, or otherwise, unobtainable, Webster's Dictionary of Law, Indian Edn. (2005), p. 49.Best evidence rule, is the rule when the judges and sages of the law have laid down that there is but one general rule of evidence, the best that the nature of the case will allow, Omychnd v. Barker, (1745) 1 Atk 21.Best evidence rule, means the rule requires in effect that the best or most direct evidence of a fact should be adduced or its absence accounted e.g. the best evidence of the existence of the contents of a letter i.e. its production in court. The rule no longer applies as the court admits all relevant evidence, Kajaal v. Nable, (1982) 75 Cr App 149....
- << Prev.
- Next >>