Law of Evidence Report: Classification, Witnesses, and Burden

This report provides a comprehensive overview of the Law of Evidence, focusing on key concepts and procedures within the Sri Lankan legal framework. It begins with an introduction to the law of evidence and its role in legal proceedings, followed by an in-depth examination of the relevancy of evidence, including spoken and documentary evidence. The report then delves into admissions and confessions, clarifying their significance in determining judgments. Furthermore, it categorizes evidence into various classifications, such as spoken, circumstantial, real, personal, hearsay, judicial, non-judicial, and documentary evidence. The report also details the procedures for examining witnesses, including examination-in-chief, cross-examination, and re-examination, along with methods for impeaching witness credibility. Finally, the report addresses the burden of proof and its exceptions, providing a complete understanding of evidence law. The report also includes analysis of the competency of an accused and the admissibility of hearsay evidence.

Law of Evidence

Table of Contents
Introduction......................................................................................................................................1
Task 1...............................................................................................................................................1
P1.1 Relevancy of evidence........................................................................................................1
P1.2 confession and confessions.................................................................................................2
Task 2...............................................................................................................................................3
P2.1 Classification of evidence...................................................................................................3
Task 3...............................................................................................................................................4
P3.1 Procedures that are required for examination of witness....................................................4
P3.2 Impeaching the credibility of the witness...........................................................................5
Task 4...............................................................................................................................................6
P4.1 Burden of proof...................................................................................................................6
Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................6
References........................................................................................................................................7
.........................................................................................................................................................8

Introduction
Law of evidence is a law that has been made by Sri Lankan government to provide the
rules and consideration that would help the citizens of the country and court rooms while hearing
any case. This is also known as rule of evidence that helps in encompassing the rules and the
legal principles which helps in governing the proof of facts while in the legal proceedings. This
law helps in determining what evidence should be considered while reaching any judgement.
This report is about introduction of the facts that are related to Law of Evidence. This report is
used to analyse the competency of an accused and to analyse the difference between the sworn
evidence and a dock statement. Also this would include the admissibility of hearsay evidence in
the court would be discussed. At last the exception to burden of proof would be analysed.
Task 1
P1.1 Relevancy of evidence
Evidence is a terms of facts that is given in any suit or proceedings that helps in bringing
judgement for the given case. Evidence includes the statements which are permitted by courts to
be presented before the judge in relation to the case so as to prove the statement provided while
in proceedings (Aronson and Howard, 2013). These may be classified into spoken or written
evidence. As if the statement are made through by the person himself then it is known as spoken
evidence or if this is made by the documented form that has been shown for inspection of court
then it is called as documentary evidence. The evidence which are relevant means that it has the
tendency to ensure that the facts are relevant and if this is not provided then it would result in
wrong decision that would be made according to irrelevant evidence. These evidence may also
contains the evidence which bears upon credibility of witness or hearsay declarant.
The relevancy of evidence depends on the fact that it is able to prove it right and exist as
on the day of trial. It is seen that evidence may be conferred in any proceedings and in suit but
the existence and non existence of facts is an issue which makes the evidence provided relevant
in front of court (Harris, 2012). It is regarded that facts that makes an issue and are relevant to
the case or a transaction is considered to be relevant. Also the evidence that is made in front of
court should material which means this should contain the facts that are related to the transaction
as whole. The evidence provided should have happen at the same time or place or at another time
or place but it should be connected to the case for being relevant.
1

It is also seen that facts that occurs in the occasion or causes or are an effect of immediate
cause or which constitutes the relevant cause under which they happened are considered as
relevant evidence for admissibility under any trial proceedings. The evidence should also show a
motive or preparation that has been done in the case that is being discussed in the court.
P1.2 Admission and confessions
Admission and confession is a term that helps in deciding and helping in achieving the
judgement of the case which is being decided in the court. These helps courts in coming to the
conclusion and to bring the judgement on time. Admission may be defined as a statement that
may be spoken or in documentary forms (Arshadi and Eyssell, 2012). These Admission that are
made by a person suggest the inference of the facts and also helps to resolve issue. It is seen that
confessions may be relevant claims that should be proved against the person who desires to make
them. It is seen that spoken confession and the content of documents are not applicable unless
and until the party which is declaring to establish them shows that it is required to give a
alternative proof of the content or the documents that has been provided. Also in the case of civil
proceeding Admission is not applicable if it is made on the condition that proof is not to be made
given.
Confession is known as the acknowledgment that is made by the person who is accused
of an offence which states the acceptance of the crime that has been committed. If the confession
that is made is made by inducement, threat or promise is considered as irrelevant. If the
confession is done by an defendant person then it is termed as irrelevant if this confession has
been caused by inducement, danger or commitment (Haack, 2014). If any confession is made to
a police officer than it should not be proved against an accused person. Also if any confession is
made while in the hands of a police official than it would not be liable to prove against the
person but if it is made in the presence of magistrate then it would be considered as true.
There is lot of difference between a confession and confession that are provided below:
Confession Admission
It is regarded as a voluntary and direct
acknowledgement of guilt.
It is the situation where the confession falls
short and the actual confession of guilt is being
made. It is considered as the confession of a
fact.
2

It is made by the accused who is sought to be
proved in the court of law
This is usually related to the civil matters and
comprises of all the statements amounting to
confession that are made in accordance to the
evidence act.
It is considered as a conclusive proof of doing
any wrong
It is considered as a substantive evidence.
If a confession is made by two or more person
jointly can be used against a co-accused as an
evidence.
In this case if any Admission made would not
be liable to prove against other defendants.
It is considered as a direct confession of the
guilt.
It is considered as the direct Admission that is
made by the person making him liable of the
guilt that has been made.
Task 2
P2.1 Classification of evidence
Evidence is one of the key factors that helps in deciding the outcome of a case that has
been filled. Hence it is required for the law to classify the evidence carefully and appropriately.
According to the Evidence act, evidence can be divided into various class which includes the
following:
 spoken evidence: it is considered as those evidence which are personally seen or being
heard by the witness (Beletsky and et. al., 2011). All the statements that are made in the
court which are not supported by the documentary evidence are known as spoken e
evidence. Spoken evidence should always be direct. The evidence may be considered as
direct when it establishes main facts in case.
 Circumstantial Evidence: This is the type of evidence that is produced when the direct
evidence is not available. These are the evidence that tends to establish the facts in a issue
by providing another fact which does not conclusively establish that fact.
3

 Real evidence: it is the evidence that is brought in front of court by doing inspection of
physical objects (Givati and Troiano, 2012). These are not related to the information that
is derived from the witness or documents but are derived from physical objects.
 Personal evidence: it is a spoken testimony that is done by witness. This is done by a
human agent through a way of disclosure or through a voluntary signs.
 Hearsay evidence: it is the evidence that is one which has neither personally seen nor
heard. These are the evidence that has been come to knowledge of the person through the
some other person and on the basis of this it has been made in front of court. This type of
evidence is considered as the weakest kind of evidence.
 Judicial evidence: These are the evidence which are given in front of the magistrates
court. It may in form of confession that are made by the party who is accused.
 Non judicial evidence: it is the evidence that is made by the person outside the court and
also not in front of the magistrate of the court. It may be made in front of the police or
any other non judicial person.
 Documentary evidence: it is a form of evidence that has been made in front of court
which are in documentary form. These may be in kind of electronic records, or in paper
format which are produced for inspection of the court.
Task 3
P3.1 Procedures that are required for examination of witness.
It is the implied condition that orders through which witness are confronted in front of
judge should be regulated by law. Where either of the party proposes to give evidence of any of
the fact than the magistrate may ask the person who is giving evidence that in which matter the
facts provided would be applicable. Also judge may make evidence as true if he thinks the fact is
relevant (Casey, 2011). Here the judge has to decide as to admissibility of evidence. The scrutiny
of a informant shall be called by the person who may be called as investigation in chief. If the
scrutiny of informant is made through contrary party then it is called cross examination. The
procedure that is followed for examination of witness is that the witness is firstly examined in
chief then it is crosswise examined, after which the party who is aggrieved may demand for re
examination. It is seen that scrutiny and cross scrutiny must associate to the applicable facts, re-
examination shall be oriented by the statement of matters that were mentioned in cross
4

examination and if the new evidences are introduced in the tribunal then the other party may ask
for further cross examination (Gilbert, 2011). Witness to fictitious character of the party may be
cross examined or re-analysed. A informant may be cross questioned as to former statements that
was made in written and was applicable to the matter in question without such written material to
be shown to the party in the court. The examination in chief is one of the phase in the procedure
of adducing evidence from the informant in a court of law. Direct scrutiny is done normally to
provide the elicit information in aid of facts that will be used to fulfil a needful element of a
parties claim or a defence (Cheng and Hoekstra, 2013). In this it is prohibited to ask direct
leading questions and this also prevents advocates from feeding direct favourable answers.
It is also seen that credit of witness can be impeached by the consent of court if it
includes that it has been done through:
 The evidence of persons who testify or believe him to be undeserving of approval.
 Or it has been proofed that informant is corrupt or has acknowledged the offer of bribe.
 It has been proofed by former statements that are incompatible with any portion of his
information which is unresistant to be contradicted.
P3.2 Impeaching the credibility of the witness.
In Sri Lankan law there are two ways through which the credibility of the witness is
being impeached. These includes:
 Asking witness of question to discredit him.
 And by evidence that is being provided by others witness.
It is seen that if a witness is cross scrutinized and in constituent to the matters and the facts
defendant can ask questions so as to check the accuracy of informant credibility, to check who he
is what is his perspective in life and also to check or to shake the recognition by hurting the
character of the witness.
Court has the liberty to oblige a witness to answer those question only if the questions are
proper and would severely affect the sentiment of the tribunal (Delisle And et. al., 2018). Also
these question would be improper if those questions are so remote that matter in issue and also
would not affect the credit of witness. If there is a great disproportion among the statements
made against informant character and the value of information is factual.
Where the credit of the witness is impeached by other person then, the adverse party can
attack the credit of witness through 4 different ways. These 4 ways includes the following:
5

 Through evidencing the person who would testify that they accept him to be undeserving
of credit.
 Or by proving that informant has been bribed or incidental thereto
 Or it is been proofed by the former statements that are inconsistent with any of the part
which are contradicted.
 Lastly if in the case where a person is being prosecuted of a rape then it would be shown
that he was of mostly of libertine character.
Task 4
P4.1 Burden of proof
The burden to proof of the specific fact emphasis on the individual who wants the trial to
be initiated. It is on the individual who want the court to accept its existence. The burden of
proof as to any specific fact depends upon that individual who wants the court to believe that it is
true (Faure and Svatikova, 2012). If an individual is accused of any crime then load of proving
the existence of the condition which has brought case into existence is upon him. Also it is the
duty of the person to bring in and to show the burden of proof when he is having the knowledge
of any person. When it is seen in the question of law that whether the man is alive or dead and it
is seen that he is alive within the period of 30 years then the concern of proving that person was
dead lies in on the person who consented it before.
Where there exist a interrogation of good faith of the dealing between the parties then the
onus of proving the good faith is on the person who is within the position of having a progressive
activeness.
Conclusion
From the above report it is analysed that law of evidence is the main legal structure that
helps the courts in deciding about the matters on timely basis. There is a vast difference between
the confession and confession that are made by the people in front of court. Also according to the
evidence act evidences are classified in different types which helps court in taking any decision.
From the report it is seen that there are different methods that are used to impeach the credibility
of witness.
6

7

References
Books and Journals
Aronson, R.H. and Howard, M.A., 2013. The Law of Evidence in Washington. Matthew Bender.
Arshadi, H. and Eyssell, T.H., 2012. The law and finance of corporate insider trading: theory
and evidence. Springer Science & Business Media.
Beletsky, L. and et. al., 2011. Police training to align law enforcement and HIV prevention:
preliminary evidence from the field. American Journal of Public Health. 101(11).
pp.2012-2015.
Casey, E., 2011. Digital evidence and computer crime: Forensic science, computers, and the
internet. Academic press.
Cheng, C. and Hoekstra, M., 2013. Does strengthening self-defense law deter crime or escalate
violence? Evidence from expansions to castle doctrine. Journal of Human Resources.
48(3). pp.821-854.
Delisle, R.J. And et. al., 2018. Evidence: Principles and problems. Thomson Reuters.
Faure, M.G. and Svatikova, K., 2012. Criminal or administrative law to protect the environment?
Evidence from Western Europe. Journal of Environmental Law. 24(2). pp.253-286.
Gilbert, M.D., 2011. Does law matter? theory and evidence from single-subject adjudication. The
Journal of Legal Studies. 40(2). pp.333-365.
Givati, Y. and Troiano, U., 2012. Law, economics, and culture: Theory of mandated benefits and
evidence from maternity leave policies. The Journal of Law and Economics. 55(2).
pp.339-364.
Haack, S., 2014. Evidence matters: Science, proof, and truth in the law. Cambridge University
Press.
Harris, D.A., 2012. Failed evidence: Why law enforcement resists science. NYU Press.
Ronconi, L., 2012. Globalization, domestic institutions, and enforcement of labor law: Evidence
from Latin America. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society. 51(1).
pp.89-105.
8