Any kind of unwanted or unexpected or simply irrelevant evidence will not suffice. In every case the offered evidence must ultimately be brought to the touchstone. Any relevant evidence is admissible. Simultaneously any kind of irrelevant evidence is inadmissible.
In this case, a relevant evidence will be one kind of evidence which will really affect the assessment of the jury about the accused person’s guilty. Evidence may also be relevant if relates to the credibility of the witness.
Now there are three major kinds of relevant evidences. And they are described below –
Confessional evidence can be described in one line in this way – ‘He told me that he did it.’ So from this example it can be easily understood what kind of evidence is this. Let it be described in a more elaborate way. Suppose, any person (the accused person in this case) has done any kind of offense. The court has been enlisted him already on the suspect list. Now when trial is going on, if it can be proved somehow that the accused has already told somebody face-to-face after committing the offense that he has done the offense then it will be a confessional evidence.
Even if the accused person presents or acknowledges it that thing standing in front of the jury that he has committed the offense then also it may be considered as a confessional evidence. But there is a fact. Whatever the confession the accused person makes, it has to be relevant. If standing in front of the jury the accused confesses things that is completely rubbish or irrelevant to the offense trial then, that will not suffice. Now, if there is a confessional evidence presented in front of the jury then there might be in some case an opportunity to less the sentence period. But that thing totally depends up on the jury.
It is also one kind of evidence. It can also be described in this way – ‘I saw him do it.’ This is quite straightforward. That means suppose a person is accused of committing any offense. Now, suppose while committing the offense, somehow he got caught in other’s eye. That means any other person saw the convicted person to commit any offense in his own eyes. That means, then that person becomes an eye-witness of that crime. And that thing he proves in the court will be considered as an identification evidence. In some cases, identification evidences can be considered as the main evidence if none other found and the decision is also given based on the decision that jury has made considering the identification evidence. One thing also remains same as before, the evidence should be relevant.
Circumstantial evidence is also one kind of evidence. This type of evidence can be described in one line in this way – ‘He must have done it.’ Circumstantial evidence literally means considering the circumstances happened during the offense took place finding any kind of evidence that can later on change the trajectory of the trial. So these kind of evidence carries the most weight in any kind of trial as it is the most neutral one. And to suffice, this kind of evidence must be relevant.
Disclaimer : This article is just a summary of the subject matter being discussed and should not be regarded as a comprehensive legal advice for you to defend yourself alone. If you are charged with criminal offences, it is recommended that you seek legal assistance from criminal lawyers.