WHAT IS EVIDENCE?

Evidence is any material presented in a court of law to support

a case or to prove or disprove a fact. Evidence can come in
various forms, such as documents, testimony, physical objects,
or digital data. It plays a crucial role in the legal process by
helping the judge or jury make informed decisions based on the
presented information.
"Evidence" refers to the information, materials, or
statements presented in a legal proceeding to establish the
truth or falsity of a fact. It is the means by which parties in
a legal case prove or disprove their claims. Evidence can
take various forms, including documents, witness
testimony, physical objects, or digital records, and it plays
a crucial role in determining the outcome of legal cases.
Inotherwords, Evidence is an aspect of procedural law which
relates to proof of facts before the court, how facts may be
proved, who may prove, and what facts may or may not be
proved in a court of law.
Witnesses must only give evidence of facts observed by
them, and not evidence of their opinion (i.e. evidence of
inferences drawn from those facts). However, witnesses may
give evidence of opinion as a means of conveying relevant
facts observed by that witness.

The law of evidence, also known as the rules of evidence,

encompasses the rules and legal principles that govern the
proof of facts in a legal proceeding. These rules determine
what evidence must or must not be considered by the trier
of fact in reaching its decision. There are several different
types of evidence considered at criminal trial, and they don’t all
carry the same weight or importance. It is up to a judge or jury
to listen to the evidence and weigh the information and make
findings of fact.
 "facts in issue" refer to the specific facts that need to be
proven or disproven in a legal proceeding in order to determine
the outcome of the case. These are the primary issues that the
court must decide upon based on the evidence presented.
On the other hand, "facts relevant to the facts in issue" are
the secondary or supporting facts that are presented to help
establish or disprove the main facts in issue. These relevant
facts provide context, background, or corroborating evidence to
strengthen the arguments about the key issues in the case. For
example, in a criminal trial for murder, the fact in issue would
be whether the accused committed the murder. Relevant facts
could include witness testimony, forensic evidence, and the
accused's alibi, all of which support or refute the central fact in
issue. In summary, facts in issue are the main issues that need
to be proven, while facts relevant to the facts in issue are the
supporting details and evidence that help establish or challenge
the main issues in a legal case.

Inotherwords Facts in issues- Facts mean

the ‘happening or existence of anything’ these are
particularly knowledge or any information related to
anything. Whereas, facts in issue are those facts which
are in question or those facts which need to be proved
for the purpose of ascertaining some information and
making inferences out of relevant information in the
case in obtaining justice.
Illustration-

A is the owner of a shop- it is a fact.

A is accused of robbery- now whether A committed

robbery or not is a fact in issue.
  Relevant Fact- The actual meaning of relevant
is ‘connected’, so those facts, which give any
inferences or support or influence to any other
facts then these facts, are known as relevant
facts.
Illustration-

A is accused of Murder of B in Agra (Fact)

A was in Canada for his business meetings at the time

of the murder (Relevant fact)

A fact is considered to be proved when, the court

after considering all the evidence after the trials
and proceeding either believes the happening of
the case in such a manner as it is expressed or if
the court makes a probable inference beyond
reasonable doubt and believes that the existence
of the case in such manner as it was explained.

A fact is considered to be disproved when the

court after considering all the evidence after the
trials and proceeding either believes that it does
not exists as explained or if the court makes a
probable inference beyond reasonable doubt and
does not believes the existence of case in such a
manner as it was explained.

A fact is called not proved when the facts are in

a circumstantial condition that they are neither
proved nor they are disproved.

Components of evidence
1.Relevance: Evidence must be directly related to the issues in
the case. It should help prove or disprove a fact that is in
question.
 2.Admissibility: Evidence must meet certain legal standards
to be admissible in court. This includes considerations such as
whether the evidence was obtained legally and whether it is
reliable.
3.Materiality: Evidence must be significant to the case. It
should have the potential to influence the outcome of the
proceedings.
4.Competence: Evidence must be presented by competent
witnesses or sources. Incompetent evidence, such as hearsay
or illegally obtained evidence, may not be admissible.
5.Authenticity: Evidence must be what it claims to be. It
should be genuine and not tampered with to maintain its
credibility.
6.Weight: The probative value of evidence is also considered.
The weight of evidence refers to its strength or persuasiveness
in proving a fact.
7.Corroboration: Corroborative evidence is supplementary
evidence that supports or confirms the main evidence
presented. It helps strengthen the overall credibility of the case.
Understanding these components of evidence is essential for
legal professionals to effectively present their cases and for
judges or jurors to evaluate the evidence presented before
them
In the law of evidence, there are several types or categories of
evidence, each serving a specific purpose in proving or
disproving facts in a legal proceeding. Understanding these
types of evidence is crucial for presenting a strong case in
court.
Here are the main types of evidence and their relevance in the
law of evidence:
1. Real Evidence
Real evidence is also known as physical evidence and
includes fingerprints, bullet casings, a knife, DNA samples –
things that a jury can see and touch. Real evidence can usually
prove or disprove certain facts in the case. Real evidence also
has a lot of weight can is considered more important as it tends
to prove certain facts or issues beyond a reasonable doubt.

To be admitted, real evidence must be relevant, material, and

authentic. Lawyers must establish that the evidence belonged
to the accused or was used in the crime.
2. Demonstrative Evidence Demonstrative Evidence
can help illustrate or demonstrate the testimony of a witness. It
can include a map of the crime scene or charts or images and
pictures of the location that a witness describes. The
demonstrative evidence needs to reflect the witness’s
description accurately. Often Google map print outs or
photographs are provided to assist witnesses with locations
and distances.

3. Documentary Evidence
Documentary evidence is evidence introduced through
documents instead of through oral witness accounts such as a
diary entry, newspaper, business records or even a contract.
With documentary evidence, it is essential to establish that the
document is authentic and from a reliable source. The
Evidence act cap 26 in Sierra Leone establishes the rules and
regulations surrounding how this evidence can be used and the
conditions to tender it as an exhibit at a trial.

4. Witness Testimony
Testimonial evidence is when a witness gets on the stand and
provides evidence of their observations. They are testifying to
events that they personally observed or heard. It is considered
both highly important and valuable at criminal trial, but also
problematic and unreliable. For example, whom they witnessed
involved in a fight, the observations they personally made of the
fight and anything they may have heard during the fight. They
cannot be testifying to what others told them about the fight.
Also, they cannot provide opinions or speculate about issues
surrounding the fight.
Expert Testimony: Statements made by individuals with
specialized knowledge or expertise in a particular field, such as
forensic scientists or medical professionals. In a medical
malpractice case, an expert witness may provide testimony
about the standard of care.

Evidence may be direct or circumstantial. Direct evidence

is direct proof of a fact, such as testimony by a witness about
what that witness personally saw or heard or did.
Circumstantial evidence is indirect evidence, that is, it is proof
of one or more facts from which one can find other fact or make
inferences to reach a just conclusion.
Inotherwords, direct evidence is testimony or physical evidence
that directly proves a fact without the need for any inference or
presumption. It provides clear and immediate proof of a fact at
issue in a legal case. It typically involves a first-hand account of
an event or observation by a witness.

Example: In a robbery case, a security camera video

recording showing the defendant holding a gun and demanding
money from the cashier is considered direct evidence of the
defendant's involvement in the robbery. It directly shows the act
itself.

EXAMPLE OF DIRECT EVIDENCE

Assume P killed Q by shooting him, and the following are the
prosecution witnesses who are testifying about the murder: R claim
he witnessed P Murdering Q. S claims that he did not witness P
Murdering Q, but that he did witness both of them arguing over
money the day before the murder, and that P vowed to kill Q one
day. T claims that on the day of the murder, he observed P fleeing
from Q’s residence with a gun in his hand. According to U, the doctor
performed an autopsy or post-mortem on P’s body and discovered
that Q died of gunshot wounds. V, the ballistics expert, claims that he
test-fired the gun used in the crime and found that the markings on
the bullet were identical to those found in P’s body. As a result, the
murderer used the same gun. V, the fingerprint specialist, claims that
he compared A’s fingerprints to those found on the gun and found
them to be identical. In this case, R witnessed the major event of P
killing Q, and his testimony is referred to as direct evidence. If the
court believes the witness is credible, the court can declare P guilty
right away.
2. Circumstantial Evidence:
- Circumstantial evidence does not directly prove a fact but
instead relies on the inference or presumption of a fact based
on a series of circumstances or facts. It requires the fact-finder
(jury or judge) to draw conclusions from the available evidence
rather than presenting the fact itself.

Example: In the same robbery case, if the defendant's

fingerprints are found on the cash register and the defendant's
clothing matches the description provided by witnesses, this is
circumstantial evidence. It doesn't directly prove the robbery but
allows the fact-finder to infer the defendant's involvement
based on the circumstances.

The key difference is that direct evidence provides immediate,

undeniable proof of a fact, while circumstantial evidence relies
on logical inferences drawn from a set of related facts or
circumstances. Both types of evidence can be used in legal
proceedings, and circumstantial evidence can be powerful in
building a case, but it doesn't provide the same level of
certainty as direct

Character evidence in the law of evidence refers to

information or testimony about a person's character, traits, or
reputation. This type of evidence can be used to establish a
person's character as it relates to their behavior or actions in a
legal case. Character evidence can be presented to either
support or challenge a person's credibility, honesty, or
propensity to act in a certain way. It is generally divided into two
categories: character evidence for propensity and character
evidence for impeachment.

1. Character Evidence for Propensity:

- This form of character evidence is used to show that a
person has a particular disposition or tendency to act in a
certain manner. It suggests that their past actions are indicative
of their current behaviour.

Example: In a criminal trial, if the prosecution presents

evidence of the defendant's prior convictions for theft, it is
character evidence for propensity, intended to establish that the
defendant has a predisposition to commit theft and is likely the
perpetrator in the current theft case.

2. Character Evidence for Impeachment:

- Character evidence can also be used to challenge the
credibility of a witness. This is done by presenting evidence that
contradicts the witness's reputation for truthfulness or honesty.
 Example: In a civil case where a witness is testifying about
the plaintiff's character for truthfulness, the defence may
introduce evidence that the witness has a poor reputation in the
community for being truthful, undermining the witness's
credibility.

It's important to note that the admissibility of character evidence

is subject to specific rules and limitations, and it varies by
jurisdiction. In many cases, character evidence is not
admissible unless the character of a party or witness becomes
directly relevant to the case, such as in defamation, self-
defence, or certain sexual assault cases. The goal is to strike a
balance between allowing relevant character evidence while
preventing unfair prejudice or distraction from the central issues
of a case.

PROBATIVE VS. PREJUDICIAL EVIDENCE

Certainly! In the law of evidence, probative value and
prejudicial effect are crucial concepts that relate to the
admissibility of evidence in court.

1. Probative Value: Probative value refers to the evidential

significance or relevance of a piece of evidence in proving or
disproving a fact at issue in a legal case. Evidence is
considered to have probative value if it tends to make a fact
more or less likely. In other words, it helps the trier of fact
(usually a judge or jury) in understanding the truth or resolving
the dispute. Evidence with high probative value is typically
more reliable and directly related to the case.

Example: In a murder trial, a witness who can testify to having

seen the defendant at the crime scene may provide evidence
with high probative value because it directly relates to the
central issue of the defendant's presence at the scene.
2. Prejudicial Effect:

Prejudicial effect, on the other hand, pertains to the potential

harm that can be caused by admitting certain evidence, often
due to its emotional impact, tendency to inflame passions, or
risk of biasing the jury. Evidence with a prejudicial effect may
unduly influence the decision-making process, even if it is not
directly relevant to the case. Courts aim to exclude evidence
with a high prejudicial effect to ensure a fair trial.

Example: In a theft case, if the prosecution wants to introduce

evidence of the defendant's prior unrelated criminal convictions,
the court might exclude it because it could unfairly prejudice the
jury against the defendant, even if it's not directly related to the
theft charge.

In practice, judges must weigh the probative value of evidence

against its prejudicial effect. If the prejudicial effect substantially
outweighs the probative value, the evidence may be excluded.
This balance is essential to ensure a fair trial and to prevent
evidence that could lead to an unfair or biased verdict from
being admitted.

1. Corroborative Evidence:
Corroborative evidence is evidence that supports or
strengthens the credibility and reliability of other evidence or
testimony presented in a legal case. It is used to confirm or
validate the claims or assertions made by a witness or party.
Corroborative evidence is not meant to be independent proof of
a fact but rather to provide additional support or confirmation.

Example: In a criminal case where a witness testifies that they

saw the defendant at the crime scene, surveillance footage
from a nearby camera showing the defendant at the same
location during the relevant time period can be considered
corroborative evidence.

2. Electronic Evidence:
Electronic evidence, also known as digital evidence, pertains to
information or data that is stored electronically, such as on
computers, smartphones, or other digital devices. This type of
evidence is increasingly relevant in the modern legal
landscape, as it includes emails, text messages, social media
posts, digital documents, and other electronic records.
Electronic evidence can be used to establish facts,
demonstrate intent, or provide context in legal proceedings.

Example: In a civil lawsuit involving a breach of contract, email

exchanges between the parties discussing the terms of the
contract and any changes made electronically can be
presented as electronic evidence to support the claims made
by one of the parties.

The key distinction between the two is that corroborative

evidence is primarily about supporting or strengthening other
evidence, while electronic evidence refers to the format of the
evidence itself, which is in electronic or digital form. In some
cases, electronic evidence can also serve as corroborative
evidence, such as when digital records support the claims
made by a witness or party in a case.

Financial Evidence:
- Financial evidence pertains to documents, records, or
testimony related to the financial aspects of a legal case. It
includes information about financial transactions, accounts,
assets, liabilities, income, and expenses. This type of evidence
is often used to establish financial facts, such as the value of
assets, income for tax purposes, or the existence of financial
fraud.
 Example: In a divorce case, bank statements, tax returns,
and property records can be presented as financial evidence to
determine the division of assets and support payments.

2. Hearsay:
- Hearsay is a rule of evidence that generally prohibits the
use of statements made by someone who is not testifying in
court to prove the truth of the matter asserted in that statement.
It involves repeating or presenting out-of-court statements as
evidence, which can be seen as less reliable because the
person who made the statement is not available for cross-
examination.

Example: If a witness testifies that they heard a third party

say, "The defendant stole the money," that statement would be
considered hearsay and may not be admissible to prove that
the defendant stole the money, as the person who made the
statement is not present to be questioned in court.

In summary, financial evidence is related to financial matters

and documents, while hearsay involves the use of out-of-court
statements as evidence. Financial evidence is often used to
establish financial facts and transactions, while hearsay
statements are generally excluded from evidence due to
concerns about their reliability and the inability to cross-
examine the declarant. However, there are exceptions to the
hearsay rule in certain circumstances.

.
Oral Evidence- where oral evidence is those evidence,
which the witness has either personally seen or heard
any such facts or information which has the capability
of proving or establishing the facts in issues. The only
condition with these types of evidence is that they
must be direct or positive for establishing the fact in
issues.

 Documentary Evidence where those facts or

information in the form of the document can be
witnessed directly by the court of law for
establishing the facts in issues.
 Primary Evidence- these are those facts or
information, which by any means has a great
capability of proving or disproving any fact in
issues, then such information is considered as
primary evidence like a paper document of any
vehicle is primary evidence to prove the
ownership of the vehicles.
 Secondary Evidence- these are that evidence
which is given in the absence of primary
evidence like when there is no primary evidence
than secondary evidence can be used to prove a
fact in issue.
Eg. If the original paper document is lost then its
photocopies can be used as secondary evidence to
prove the ownership.

 Real Evidence- Real evidence means material

evidence where the court can inspect the
evidence directly and requires no further
knowledge.
 .
 Judicial Evidence- Statements of witnesses,
documentary evidence, and facts established
during the examination of a witness in the court,
self-incrimination is some kind of evidence, which
the court receives itself, and such evidence are
known as judicial evidence.
  Non- Judicial Evidences- Confession made by
the witness or accused or victim outside the
court are considered as non- judicial evidence.
 Prima Facie Evidence- The concept of ‘on the
face of it’ with respect to evidence is a principle
when the court presumes any facts and
considered them proved until they are disproved,
then such evidence is known as prima facie
evidence.

SUMMARY
1.Direct Evidence: - Direct evidence is testimony or physical
evidence that directly establishes a fact. For example, an
eyewitness seeing a crime being committed provides direct
evidence. This type of evidence is considered very strong in
court because it does not require any inference or
interpretation.
2.Circumstantial Evidence: - Circumstantial evidence is
evidence that can be used to infer a fact. It consists of a series
of facts that, when considered together, lead to a conclusion.
For example, finding a suspect's fingerprint at a crime scene is
circumstantial evidence. While each individual piece of
circumstantial evidence may not be conclusive on its own,
collectively, they can establish guilt or innocence.
3.Real Evidence: - Real evidence consists of physical objects
or exhibits presented in court. This can include weapons,
documents, clothing, or any tangible items relevant to the case.
Real evidence helps to corroborate witness testimony and
provide a tangible connection to the events in question.
4.Testimonial Evidence: - Testimonial evidence is given by a
witness under oath in court or through a sworn statement.
Witnesses provide first-hand accounts of events, observations,
or professional opinions that are relevant to the case. Witness
testimony is crucial in both civil and criminal cases to establish
facts and credibility.
5.Documentary Evidence: - Documentary evidence includes
any form of written or recorded material that is submitted in
court. This can be contracts, emails, photographs, financial
records, or any other documents that support a party's case.
Documentary evidence is often used to prove the existence of
agreements, transactions, or other important facts.
6.Character Evidence: - Character evidence relates to a
person's reputation or trait of character. It can be used to
assess a person's credibility, propensity to act in a certain way,
or to show conformity with their character. Character evidence
is restricted in certain circumstances to prevent unfair
prejudice.
7.Demonstrative Evidence: - Demonstrative evidence
includes visual aids or demonstrations used to help the judge or
jury understand complex information presented in court. This
can include diagrams, charts, maps, videos, or computer
simulations to illustrate key points of the case. The relevance of
these types of evidence in the law of evidence lies in their
ability to establish the truth, credibility, and validity of the facts
presented in a case. By presenting a combination of different
types of evidence, legal practitioners can build a strong and
persuasive argument to support their client's position. Each
type of evidence serves a specific purpose in corroborating
claims, challenging the opposing party's arguments, and
assisting the fact-finder (judge or jury) in reaching a just
decision based on the available information. Understanding the
nuances of different types of evidence is crucial for effective
advocacy and the administration of justice.
THANK YOU.
ANY QUESTION OR COUNTER ATTACK