Presenting Evidence in Court

The easiest method of presenting evidence is to merely tell the truth. The best way to relate your evidence is to speak in a simple, forthright manner as you unfold the account of your investigation step by step. Your testimony should be nothing if not the plain, uncolored truth, free from any prejudice, malice or ill will. Evidence that you have uncovered in your investigation, which may well be favorable to the defendant/accused, also forms part of that evidence.

Formalities & Credibility

Your client requires your evidence to support his legal case or defense. You will be required to appear in court to do this. You will not receive a summons, but you will be contacted by the client and told when and where to appear. You are obligated to appear.

The court system has a very formal atmosphere, this is in part intended to impress and intimidate you so you are more likely to tell the truth. Nervousness is a natural part of going to court. As you become more experienced in the process, you will become less anxious.

Finally, the matter of nerves. There is no denying that the pomp and formalities of the courts are in part intended to impress and intimidate you. There is logic in the presumption that if you are anxious and awed by the process, you are less likely to be able to lie.

Remember it’s not just what evidence you present it’s how you present it, particularly before a tribunal. The signed statement you obtained is largely useless, as it cannot be tendered, however, you may broadly read from it and give the evidence that way.

Evidence is information that is given which tends to prove or disprove a fact or proposition.

EVIDENCE: “Data on which to base proof or to establish truth or falsehood. A mark or sign that makes evident. Matter produced before a court of law in an attempt to prove or disprove a point of issue. Show clearly”.

Your search for evidence must be unbiased, you will discover both evidence for and evidence against the client in a lot of cases. Failure to reveal both for and against is negligent. The client is trying to determine through you whether they actually are liable and perhaps should accept liability (thus, settle the claim) if it is shown that on the balance of probability they are liable.

The Law of Evidence specifies which party to an action must prove the facts in issue, the type of evidence admissible to prove them and the way in which evidence may be adduced.

All information should be treated as if it were evidence. Some may be inadmissible under various rules of evidence; however, it is not up to you to make that decision. Leave that for the lawyers of the client. If everything is treated as evidence it will not cause a problem if it is not used but if it is not treated as evidence and is later required there could be problems. Anything obtained with the use of a confidentiality clause should be so treated.