Documents and Real Objects Flashcards
In the criminal case, the prosecutor offers the AB demand letters. He states to the court, “These are letters from defendant Garnosio and I am offering it into evidence.” Defendants object that the letters have not been authenticated. How should the judge rule and why?
Needs to be authenticated
The judge sustains the objection, so the prosecutor produces Viola Reinke, defendant Gerald Garnosio’s sixth grade English teacher to say that she can identify the handwriting in the demand letters to AB as coming from defendant Garnosio. The prosecutor again offers the letter and the defendants object. Has the government solved the authentication issue?
She has authenticated the document; if government is trying to prove the contents of the letter, needs to produce the original unless prosecutor can cite to an exception for a duplicate
Instead of producing Reinke, the government produces George DePriest, the executive at AB responsible for the management of Sea World to testify about his receipt of the handwritten letters containing the demand to release the Sea World mammals. The prosecutor again offers the letter and the defendants object. Has the government solved the authentication issue?
Has not authenticated who wrote the letter but the content of the letter; has not solved the authentication issue
The judge indicates that he feels that the government has authenticated the letters. The defendants then object that the letters are hearsay. In considering how to rule on this issue, does it matter whether the sponsoring witness is Reinke or DePriest?
Reinke would not be hearsay while depriest could be because he is testifying about an event that happened to him in the past without opportunity for cross examination
Party Opponent
Is this a case where the government should argue that the letters are not being offered for the truth of their contents, but instead to show the effect they had on AB?
The only advantage to arguing this is that not the original letter but a duplicate would be required to be produced if the letter was being used to show the effect they had on ab, so no
The judge rules that the letters are not inadmissible hearsay. The defendants now point out that the government is offering documents which have been altered and do not therefore fit the best evidence rule. The alteration is that the chemicals applied to the paper to locate fingerprints have turned portions of the document dark purple. All of the printed content can still be read. How should the judge rule and why?
Allow it because can still read the document; not every alteration if nothing to do with content makes it inadmissible
Because of the purple staining, and the fact the chemical will rub off on anyone who touches the document, the government offers photocopies of the documents which were made on their receipt at AB, before they were turned over to the police. The defendants object that as the original exists, the best evidence rule forbids the admission of the duplicate. How should the judge rule and why?
Not true that original must be admitted if original exists
If the judge indicates that he is inclined to allow the use of the duplicates, what allegation will the defendants need to prove to have the best evidence rule apply?
Have to have a concrete objection
Issues regarding the authenticity
The government claims it cannot produce one of the original threat letters as it is lost. Both AB and the government have a copy of the letter. The government offers its own copy. The defendants object that as the government lost the original through negligence, the best evidence rule bars use of the duplicate. How should the judge rule and why?
Copy still let in because no mention of negligence in the rule’ negligence doesn’t equal bad faith
The defendants object that the government is only offering selected portions of the threat letters. The complete letters are long and make a clear argument for why the mammals should be released. The government has edited the copies to only show the threats and demands. How should the judge rule and why? If the judge overrules the objection, what options do the defendants have to obtain the admission of the rest of the letters’ contents?
Go to fairness, allow other portions; cant introduce own motive; Government left out significant portion of letter but it has to be relevant
AB had video surveillance of the train siding. This shows events leading up to and following the explosions. In one frame a person can be seen touching one of the tank cars. In a later frame, that person’s face is seen. It appears to the defendant Garnosio. The government offers both the video and photos of the captured frames. The defendants object on best evidence grounds. What arguments must the government make to obtain the admission of these exhibits? (You may assume they have been properly authenticated)
Only potential is this is original and not duplicate; this is same as a print out which the rules allow
In the civil action by Clark Brothers, to show their damages, they intend to introduce a substantial volume of bank records and business records to prove their losses. Because the lawyers for Clark Brothers do not believe that anyone will be able to wade through all of these documents, they prepare a summary of the contents to present to the jury. What steps must the lawyers take to make the summary admissible in evidence? If the judge rejects their offer, what may they do with their summaries?
Give originals to other side for a reasonable amount of time so other side can ensure it is a fair summary
In the civil case, to show that AB was aware of the danger of the proximity of its tanks, plaintiffs wish to offer evidence about the Illinois Central contract which required that the tanks be separated by a greater distance. Rather than bring in a copy of the contract, the plaintiffs simply call one of the Illinois Central’s negotiators to describe what was said in the contract. AB objects that this violates the best evidence rule. How should the judge rule and why?
Talking about the content of the contract need original
Content of K gave them that awareness/notice
The government wishes to introduce the statement defendant Gerald Garnosio made to ATF agents after his arrest. Garnosio objects that this is a violation of the best evidence rule as the agent reduced the interview to a written memorandum. How should the judge rule and why?
Best evidence rule doesn’t apply because event of interview is independent of the writing
Interview is independent of the document
In her suit, Flora Welch is claiming damages from the death of her husband at the AB site. She has testified that they had been married for 15 years. AB objects that the marriage certificate is the best evidence of the marriage. How should the judge rule and why?
Can introduce as self authenticating public record; not require marriage certificate because independent of testimony
