Legal Definitions - inadmissible evidence

In a legal proceeding, inadmissible evidence refers to any information, documents, or objects that a court prohibits from being presented to the judge or jury. This means the "factfinder" (the judge or jury responsible for deciding the facts of the case) will not be allowed to consider this evidence when making their decision. Courts exclude certain evidence because it fails to meet specific legal standards designed to ensure fairness, reliability, and efficiency in trials.

Common reasons why evidence might be deemed inadmissible include:

• Irrelevance: The evidence has no bearing on the facts or issues being decided in the case.
• Unfair Prejudice or Confusion: Even if relevant, the evidence's potential to unfairly bias the jury, confuse the issues, or waste time outweighs its value.
• Privilege: The information is protected by a legal privilege, such as attorney-client privilege, spousal privilege, or doctor-patient confidentiality.
• Hearsay: It is an out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of what was said, and it doesn't fall under one of the many exceptions to the hearsay rule.
• Public Policy: Certain types of evidence are excluded to encourage beneficial societal actions, such as settlement negotiations or subsequent safety improvements.
• Lack of Authentication: The party offering the evidence cannot adequately prove that it is what they claim it to be (e.g., a genuine document or a specific object).
• Unlawfully Obtained: Evidence gathered in violation of constitutional rights, such as through an illegal search and seizure.

Here are some examples of inadmissible evidence:

• Example 1 (Hearsay and Relevance): In a civil lawsuit concerning a disputed property boundary, a witness testifies, "My neighbor told me that the previous owner, who is now deceased, always said the fence was five feet further to the west."

  Explanation: This statement would likely be inadmissible as hearsay. The witness is repeating an out-of-court statement made by someone else (the deceased owner) to prove the truth of the matter asserted (where the boundary line actually is). Unless a specific exception to the hearsay rule applies, the court would prevent the jury from considering this second-hand account. Furthermore, if the deceased owner's statement was about a completely different property, it would also be inadmissible for irrelevance.

• Example 2 (Privilege and Unfair Prejudice): During a criminal trial for embezzlement, the prosecution attempts to introduce a letter written by the defendant to their spouse, confessing to the crime. Separately, the prosecution also tries to introduce evidence that the defendant was once accused of shoplifting 15 years ago, though the charges were dropped.

  Explanation: The letter between the defendant and their spouse would likely be inadmissible due to spousal privilege, which protects confidential communications between married individuals. The evidence of the old shoplifting accusation, even if true, would probably be inadmissible because its potential to unfairly bias the jury (unfair prejudice) outweighs its limited value in proving the current embezzlement charge. Jurors might be tempted to convict based on a past, unproven accusation rather than the evidence presented for the current crime.

• Example 3 (Public Policy and Lack of Authentication): In a personal injury lawsuit following a car accident, the plaintiff tries to introduce a blurry, undated photograph they claim shows the defendant's car speeding moments before the crash. The defendant's attorney also attempts to introduce evidence of a confidential settlement offer they made to the plaintiff before the trial began.

  Explanation: The blurry, undated photograph would likely be inadmissible due to lack of authentication. The plaintiff cannot adequately prove when or where the photo was taken, or that it genuinely depicts the defendant's car speeding at the relevant time. The defendant's settlement offer would be inadmissible due to public policy. Courts generally exclude evidence of settlement offers to encourage parties to negotiate and resolve disputes out of court, without fear that their offers will be used against them if negotiations fail.