Evidence presentation is crucial in trials. The Federal Rules of Evidence govern what's admissible, focusing on relevance and reliability. Attorneys use various types of evidence and psychological techniques to build compelling cases.

Juries are influenced by how evidence is presented. Factors like the CSI effect, cognitive biases, and emotional impact can sway their decisions. Understanding these influences is key to effective trial strategies.

Rules for Presenting Evidence

Federal Rules of Evidence and Relevance

• Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) provide primary framework for admissibility and presentation of evidence in federal courts
• State courts may have their own evidentiary rules
• Principle of relevance fundamental to admissibility of evidence
  • Evidence must tend to prove or disprove a fact of consequence in the case
• Rule against hearsay generally prohibits out-of-court statements offered to prove truth of matter asserted
  • Subject to numerous exceptions and exemptions (prior inconsistent statements, excited utterances)
• Best evidence rule requires original to be produced to prove content of writing, recording, or photograph
  • Exceptions apply (lost or destroyed originals, admission by opposing party)

Authentication and Exclusion of Evidence

• Authentication required for evidence to be admissible
  • Proponent must produce evidence sufficient to support finding that item is what it purports to be
  • Methods include testimony of witness with knowledge, distinctive characteristics, or public records
• Court may exclude relevant evidence if probative value substantially outweighed by danger of:
  • Unfair prejudice
  • Confusion of issues
  • Misleading the jury
• Order of presenting evidence typically follows structured sequence:
  • Plaintiff's case-in-chief
  • Defendant's case-in-chief
  • Rebuttal evidence
  • Subject to court's discretion

Types of Evidence in Trials

Tangible and Visual Evidence

• Real evidence consists of tangible objects or items directly involved in case
  • Weapons (firearms, knives)
  • Documents (contracts, handwritten notes)
  • Physical evidence from crime scene (clothing, DNA samples)
• Demonstrative evidence includes visual aids, models, or simulations
  • Used to illustrate or explain testimony or other evidence
  • Examples: charts, graphs, 3D models of crime scenes
• Documentary evidence encompasses written or recorded materials
  • Contracts, letters, emails, business records
  • Electronic documents (PDFs, spreadsheets)

Testimonial and Character Evidence

• Testimonial evidence provided by witnesses under oath
  • Personal knowledge (eyewitness accounts)
  • Expert opinions (forensic analysts, medical professionals)
• Character evidence relates to person's traits or reputation
  • Admissible in limited circumstances
  • Examples: testimony about defendant's peaceful nature, evidence of victim's aggressive behavior

Digital and Circumstantial Evidence

• Digital evidence increasingly important in modern litigation
  • Electronic communications (text messages, emails)
  • Social media posts
  • Metadata (timestamps, geolocation data)
• Circumstantial evidence requires fact-finder to draw inferences
  • Contrasts with direct evidence
  • Examples: fingerprints at crime scene, suspicious financial transactions

Strategies for Presenting Evidence

Psychological Techniques and Visual Aids

• Attorneys employ "priming" technique to introduce key themes early
  • Influences jury's interpretation of subsequent evidence
  • Example: emphasizing defendant's character in opening statement
• "Primacy and recency" effect utilized to enhance jury retention
  • Emphasize important evidence at beginning and end of presentations
  • Example: starting and ending closing argument with strongest points
• Visual aids and technology strategically employed
  • Simplify complex information
  • Maintain jury engagement throughout trial
  • Examples: PowerPoint presentations, animated reconstructions

Presentation Techniques and Witness Examination

• "Rule of three" used to present information in triads
  • Makes information more memorable and persuasive to jury
  • Example: highlighting three key pieces of evidence supporting claim
• Cross-examination techniques used to challenge credibility
  • Leading questions
  • Impeachment (prior inconsistent statements, bias)
• Attorneys carefully consider order of witness testimony
  • Build compelling narrative
  • Maintain jury's attention
  • Example: starting with sympathetic witness, ending with expert testimony
• Objections strategically raised
  • Prevent admission of unfavorable evidence
  • Highlight importance of certain testimony to jury
  • Examples: hearsay objections, relevance objections

Impact of Evidence on Juries

Psychological Influences on Jury Decision-Making

• CSI effect influences juror expectations about forensic evidence
  • Unrealistic expectations due to popular media portrayals
  • Example: jurors expecting DNA evidence in every criminal case
• Jurors tend to give more weight to eyewitness testimony and confessions
  • Despite potential reliability issues
  • Example: overvaluing eyewitness identification in robbery case
• Availability heuristic influences jurors' perception of evidence importance
  • Greater importance placed on easily recalled or vividly presented evidence
  • Example: dramatic reenactment of crime scene having strong impact

Cognitive Biases and Evidence Evaluation

• Confirmation bias can lead jurors to interpret evidence confirming preexisting beliefs
  • Initial impressions of case influence interpretation of new evidence
  • Example: juror with anti-corporate bias more readily accepting evidence of corporate wrongdoing
• Order of evidence presentation significantly impacts jury decision-making
  • Primacy and recency effects influence weight given to certain pieces of evidence
  • Example: evidence presented at beginning of trial having stronger impact
• Emotional evidence can have disproportionate effect on jury decision-making
  • Compared to more neutral, factual evidence
  • Examples: graphic photographs, victim impact statements
• Complexity of evidence influences jury's evaluation of importance and reliability
  • Jury's ability to understand technical or scientific information affects verdict
  • Example: complex financial fraud case with intricate accounting evidence