Legal Definitions - rule of completeness

The rule of completeness, sometimes referred to as the rule of optional completeness, is a principle of evidence law designed to ensure fairness and prevent misleading impressions when only a portion of a statement, document, or recorded conversation is presented in court. If one party introduces only part of a piece of evidence, the opposing party may then introduce other parts of that same evidence if those additional parts are necessary to fully understand the original portion, clarify its meaning, or prevent it from being taken out of context. The purpose is to present a complete and accurate picture to the judge or jury, rather than a distorted one.

Here are some examples to illustrate the rule of completeness:

• Partial Email in a Business Dispute:

  Imagine a lawsuit between two companies over a failed software project. Company A's attorney introduces an email from Company B's project manager that states, "We cannot deliver the final product by the agreed-upon date." Company A uses this to show Company B admitted to breaching the contract.

  Under the rule of completeness, Company B's attorney can then introduce the rest of that same email, which continues, "We cannot deliver the final product by the agreed-upon date unless we receive the critical data files from your team by end of day today, as previously requested." This additional context clarifies that Company B's inability to meet the deadline was conditional on Company A's actions, fundamentally changing the meaning of the initial statement.

• Snippet of a Recorded Phone Call:

  In a criminal trial, the prosecution plays a short audio clip from a recorded phone call involving the defendant, where the defendant is heard saying, "I knew it was wrong to take it." The prosecution argues this is an admission of guilt regarding stolen property.

  The defense attorney invokes the rule of completeness. They then play a longer segment of the same recording, which reveals the defendant actually said, "I knew it was wrong to take it from the lost and found without checking if the owner had been contacted first, but I needed to borrow a pen." The full context shows the defendant was referring to taking a pen from a lost and found, not stolen property, and highlights their ethical concern about borrowing without permission, not an admission of a serious crime.

• Selected Paragraph from an Expert Report:

  In a personal injury case, the plaintiff's attorney presents a paragraph from a medical expert's report that states, "The patient exhibited symptoms consistent with long-term neurological damage." This is used to emphasize the severity of the plaintiff's injuries.

  The defense attorney, using the rule of completeness, can then introduce the subsequent paragraph from the same report: "The patient exhibited symptoms consistent with long-term neurological damage, however, further diagnostic tests indicated these symptoms were temporary and fully resolved within three months of the incident, with no lasting impairment." This additional information provides a complete picture of the medical findings, preventing the court from being misled into believing the damage was permanent.