tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post114522925304747798..comments2024-03-29T13:40:51.077+00:00Comments on Holocaust Controversies: If you cannot refute the evidence, you can always abuse the witnessNicholas Terryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14852758011968360596noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-21065212795777306982011-07-16T03:51:42.273+01:002011-07-16T03:51:42.273+01:00What a crock!
from: http://www.criminal-law-lawye...What a crock!<br /><br />from: http://www.criminal-law-lawyer-source.com/terms/direct-evidence.html<br /><br />As its name suggests, direct evidence relates immediately to the allegation being tested. If the direct evidence is true, the allegation is established. <b>Direct evidence, on the other hand, is evidence of a fact based on a witness's personal knowledge or observation of that fact.</b> An example of direct evidence would be the surveillance video of a person robbing a convenience store, <b>or a witness who saw a person stealing a car.</b> A person's guilt of a charged crime may be proven by direct evidence alone, if that evidence satisfies a jury beyond a reasonable doubt of the defendant's guilt regarding that crime.<br /><br /><b>The law draws no distinction between circumstantial evidence and direct evidence in terms of weight or importance.</b> Direct evidence or circumstantial evidence may be enough to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, depending on the facts of the case as the jury finds them.<br /><br />US Federal Rules of Evidence:<br /><br />Rule 401. Definition of "Relevant Evidence"<br /><br /><b>"Relevant evidence" means evidence having any tendency</b> to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.<br /><br />Notes<br /><br />Rule 402. Relevant Evidence Generally Admissible; Irrelevant Evidence Inadmissible<br /><br /><b>All relevant evidence is admissible,</b> except as otherwise provided by the Constitution of the United States, by Act of Congress, by these rules, or by other rules prescribed by the Supreme Court pursuant to statutory authority. Evidence which is not relevant is not admissible.<br /><br />CPS Policy for prosecuting cases of rape: http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/docs/prosecuting_rape.pdf<br /><br />The police will always look for corroboration or supporting<br />evidence (such as medical or scientific evidence, CCTV<br />evidence, or eyewitnesses to events prior to or after the<br />incident) <b>but it is not essential and a prosecution can still go<br />ahead without it</b>Nathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02660486969581542489noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-71912045265399657332011-06-30T12:47:44.168+01:002011-06-30T12:47:44.168+01:00"In the discipline of jurisprudence there is ..."In the discipline of jurisprudence there is a generally recognized hierarchy of evidence. At the top of the hierarchy is physical evidence, the investigation of the material traces of a crime (corpse, murder weapon, bloodstains, fingerprints and so on); the next highest rank is documentary<br />evidence and the lowest is testamentary evidence, of which a particular form of testamentary evidence, the testimony of interested partiess - those directly affected by the event in questionóis considered particularly unreliable.<br /><br />With Hilberg, the ordering is reversed: Testamentary evidence and<br />especially the testimony of interested parties is highest in the hierarchy, followed by documentary evidence. Physical evidence he does not bother with."<br /><br />- Jurgen Graf<br />The Giant with the Feet of ClayThe Black Rabbit of Inléhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12083144769375557650noreply@blogger.com