Again, using a general standard, you know that evidence, even circumstantial evidence, is admissible if it passes the 401/403 test. It's weight is determined by the factfinder. Its admissibility is NOT premissed on whether it leads to "only one conclusion."

That is nowhere to be found in any material you cited.

quote:
Circumstantial evidence can be used if it is credible and leads one to believe that only one conclusion could be reached based on the information available.

This is false. Parties argue all the time about what conclusion a factfinder should draw from circumstantial evidence. That being said, no one cares about this except me and you. I'm willing to let it go, friend.

This post was edited on 8/27/13 at 4:42 pm

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by KaiserSoze99

Member since Aug 2011

31669 posts

Posted on 8/27/13 at 4:49 pm to therick711

quote:
which inferentially proves the principal fact by establishing a condition of surrounding and limiting circumstances, whose existence is a premise from which the existence of the principal fact may be concluded by necessary laws of reasoning

"May be concluded by necessary laws of reasoning." What do you think that means? Is it possible to reason that 2+2 = 5? In logical reasoning, there is only one conclusion or it is inconclusive and unclear. Thus, the fact finder must find that no other conclusion is credible.

If you are talking about the evidentiary standard the NCAA is bound by, there is no explicit standard, but according to the NCAA investigator guy on ESPN, it's more like the clear and convincing standard, not preponderance or beyond reasonable doubt.

0 ...

Report Post

SEC Rant - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board