Evidence at Trial

[RJolly]

Hello,
The judge told me at the last hearing when I need to supply my opponent's attorney with my evidence .
I'm not exactly clear about what I need to give this attorney.
For example, if I am going to cite a law to back up my case-do I need to supply my opponent with a copy of the law, or a reference to it?
Also, if I am going to cite an academic paper, book or authoratitive text, do I need to supply my opponent with this prior to the trial? (& if so then can I give them a reference or a book name or do I have to supply them with the specific part of the text which I will be referencing?)

Thank you in advance for replies.

 

[jharris352]

Evidence is something like your bank statements, paystubs, or something that you can authenticate on the stand. Law is not evidence and does not have to be provided to the other side. However if you are bringing in a case I would make courtesy copies for the judge and the other side. Possibly even make copies of statutes for both.

"Authoritative texts" and reference material are not evidence and are not admissible in court. If you want to make that evidence you need an expert witness.

Do you have anything else.

 

[jharris352]

What are you trying to prove?

 

[RJolly]

Thank you for your response jharris.
I am reluctant to go into specific details because then it will be easy for my opponent to know my strategy if they happen to look at these forums. So I'm going to think about this before I reply.
I was hoping to send a PM but cannot do so due to the fact that I have not posted enough yet. I understand the concept that this forum is a resource for everyone, but would very much prefer to answer this question in "private" and then reveal the details once the case is over.
Is there a way to do this?
Perhaps I'm being paranoid and legal professionals wouldn't search this website in order to get information?

 

[RJolly]

I had no idea that I could not introduce academic research and statistics to back up my case, and this leads me to wonder what exactly constitutes an expert?
I will be looking into this, and if anyone has a link to cut short my search I would be grateful.
If I was to introduce data on animals, for example, would someone with a bachelors degree in science be able to quote the statistics for me?

 

[army judge]

Perhaps, you can tell us the theory of the case.

I'll provide you with two samples.

Yours does not have to be done exactly like this, but you should at least be thinking about it.

Also, are you the P or the D?

Is this a civil matter?

What is it about (a debt, a land dispute, personal injury, etc...)?

One of the basic and all too often axioms of trial advocacy is that in order to be effective at trial, you need to develop a clear, simple theme and theory. Consider two fact patterns. Fact pattern one: A local police officer (let's call him Jonathan Doe IV) arrests a male college student after being dispatched to a residence, because of a noise complaint. The next day, the officer returns to begin a sexual relationship with the arrestee. Two months later, the young man is found in the front yard of his apartment with his throat cut. Four days after the crime, an anonymous crime-stoppers' tip reveals that the victim was involved with a married cop. Immediately, the gay community begins a proactive campaign to find the killer, and information begins pouring into the police department. Eight days after the crime, Jon Doe's name is linked with the victim. It turns out, Officer Doe was even one of the responding officers to the crime scene. Suddenly, a bright and uncomfortable spotlight is turned toward the police.

Jonathan Doe IV is quickly arrested and charged with the murder. The problem is that there's no confession, no murder weapon, and the case is entirely circumstantial at best. The state's theory is that the cop murdered the college student to keep his own sexual orientation a secret from his cop buddies and to conceal his betrayal from his wife and four-month-old baby. At trial, the only evidence against the accused is the illicit affair and skin-cell DNA evidence under the victim's right fingernails matching the accused and only confirming the already admitted relationship. In fact, the state's own timeline almost precludes the opportunity for Mr. Doe to commit the murder and still make it home to give his newborn his early-morning bottle. Despite the overwhelming reasonable doubt that abounds in this case, a Missouri jury, after only six hours of deliberation, convicted Jonathan Doe IV of first-degree murder and sentenced him to life in prison without the possibility of parole.

http://www.wsba.org/media/publications/barnews/august+grissom.htm

Be prepared to refine your theory of why your client is disabled. That is, seek evidence that supports the theory of the case, but when things turn up that don't quite fit, don't try to make the facts fit the theory. Don't say, "Here is the conclusion on which I will base the facts." Instead, when the facts don't fit, rethink the theory.

You will find that revising the theory is essential in a number of your cases. For example, some cases that start out looking as if they involve only physical impairments, turn out in the end to be mental impairment cases – either because they involve somatoform disorders, that is, mental impairments that manifest themselves with physical symptoms, or because the real reason your client cannot work is, say, depression associated with a physical impairment that your client's doctor says ought not to be disabling.

The theory of the case does not have to be complicated. In fact, it is better if it can be described in a few sentences. But it must answer the central question in the case – why is your client disabled? In simple cases, the theory may address only residual functional capacity and issues presented by step five of the sequential evaluation process, the step that asks whether the claimant is capable of performing other work in the economy. Here is a simple example: The claimant, who is age 52 and has an unskilled medium work background, is limited to sedentary work by spinal stenosis. Thus, Rule 201.12 of the Medical-Vocational Guidelines requires that he be found disabled. In actual practice, you would probably include references to the evidence that show that the claimant is limited to sedentary work; but beyond this, nothing more is needed.

http://jamessocialsecurity.wordpress.com/2009/04/20/theory-of-case/

 

[jharris352]

Perhaps I'm being paranoid and legal professionals wouldn't search this website in order to get information?

Take this with all the politeness that it is meant to hold, no attorney is concerned enough about a small claims court suit by a pro se litigant to do any more than read the law and maybe a case the night before the hearing. Even that is terribly unlikely. Most likely he/she will read the case on the way into the courtroom and wing it.

I gave you a way to contact me on PM, I'll look at whatever you send me.

 

[RJolly]

Many Thanks for your reply JHarris. As a novice to the legal system I am extremely concerned about my case and have probably got a little paranoid. So thank you for putting things back into perspective.
I have a full record of my correspondence with the various parties concerned in the case and financial records to back up my case. Perhaps when the opponent's attorney sees the amount of evidence I am producing they will take the case a bit more seriously?
I do take the point though that it is highly unlikely they will be looking out for my internet postings.

I just sent you an email.

 

[army judge]

One minor point, about evidence.

It isn't evidence until admitted at trial by the judge.

Evidence is defined loosely as anything that proves the truthfulness of any assertion or allegation.

In a word, it is your proof.