Legal Definitions - impermissible comment on the evidence

An impermissible comment on the evidence occurs when a judge, during a trial, makes a statement or expresses an opinion that improperly influences the jury's independent assessment of the facts, the credibility of witnesses, or the weight of the evidence presented. Judges are expected to remain neutral and guide the jury on legal principles, leaving the determination of what actually happened and who to believe solely to the jury. Such a comment can be grounds for an appeal because it can compromise the fairness of the trial by encroaching upon the jury's role as the sole finder of fact.

Here are some examples:

• In a criminal trial for assault, a key defense witness testifies that they saw the defendant in a different location at the time of the incident. After the witness steps down, the judge remarks to the jury, "You might find it difficult to believe someone who seemed so unsure of their own timeline."

  This is an impermissible comment because the judge is directly suggesting to the jury that the witness is not credible. Determining the credibility of witnesses is exclusively the jury's role, and the judge's statement improperly influences that determination.

• During a civil lawsuit concerning a construction defect, the plaintiff presents extensive expert testimony and detailed blueprints to show faulty workmanship. While giving instructions to the jury, the judge states, "While you've heard a lot about technical specifications and blueprints, sometimes these complex documents don't tell the whole story about what actually happened on a construction site."

  This comment improperly diminishes the weight the jury might otherwise give to the expert testimony and documentary evidence. The judge's statement suggests a skepticism about the evidence, which is a factual assessment that should be left entirely to the jury.

• In a high-profile fraud case, after the prosecution has presented its entire case, the judge, in open court and within earshot of the jury, says, "Given the overwhelming financial records and communications presented, it seems quite clear what transpired here."

  Even without explicitly stating "guilty," this statement strongly implies the judge's belief in the defendant's culpability based on the evidence. Such a comment can prejudice the jury's independent deliberation on the defendant's guilt or innocence, thereby infringing on their role as the ultimate finders of fact.