presentation of evidence means

What this handout is about

This handout will provide a broad overview of gathering and using evidence. It will help you decide what counts as evidence, put evidence to work in your writing, and determine whether you have enough evidence. It will also offer links to additional resources.

Introduction

Many papers that you write in college will require you to make an argument ; this means that you must take a position on the subject you are discussing and support that position with evidence. It’s important that you use the right kind of evidence, that you use it effectively, and that you have an appropriate amount of it. If, for example, your philosophy professor didn’t like it that you used a survey of public opinion as your primary evidence in your ethics paper, you need to find out more about what philosophers count as good evidence. If your instructor has told you that you need more analysis, suggested that you’re “just listing” points or giving a “laundry list,” or asked you how certain points are related to your argument, it may mean that you can do more to fully incorporate your evidence into your argument. Comments like “for example?,” “proof?,” “go deeper,” or “expand” in the margins of your graded paper suggest that you may need more evidence. Let’s take a look at each of these issues—understanding what counts as evidence, using evidence in your argument, and deciding whether you need more evidence.

What counts as evidence?

Before you begin gathering information for possible use as evidence in your argument, you need to be sure that you understand the purpose of your assignment. If you are working on a project for a class, look carefully at the assignment prompt. It may give you clues about what sorts of evidence you will need. Does the instructor mention any particular books you should use in writing your paper or the names of any authors who have written about your topic? How long should your paper be (longer works may require more, or more varied, evidence)? What themes or topics come up in the text of the prompt? Our handout on understanding writing assignments can help you interpret your assignment. It’s also a good idea to think over what has been said about the assignment in class and to talk with your instructor if you need clarification or guidance.

What matters to instructors?

Instructors in different academic fields expect different kinds of arguments and evidence—your chemistry paper might include graphs, charts, statistics, and other quantitative data as evidence, whereas your English paper might include passages from a novel, examples of recurring symbols, or discussions of characterization in the novel. Consider what kinds of sources and evidence you have seen in course readings and lectures. You may wish to see whether the Writing Center has a handout regarding the specific academic field you’re working in—for example, literature , sociology , or history .

What are primary and secondary sources?

A note on terminology: many researchers distinguish between primary and secondary sources of evidence (in this case, “primary” means “first” or “original,” not “most important”). Primary sources include original documents, photographs, interviews, and so forth. Secondary sources present information that has already been processed or interpreted by someone else. For example, if you are writing a paper about the movie “The Matrix,” the movie itself, an interview with the director, and production photos could serve as primary sources of evidence. A movie review from a magazine or a collection of essays about the film would be secondary sources. Depending on the context, the same item could be either a primary or a secondary source: if I am writing about people’s relationships with animals, a collection of stories about animals might be a secondary source; if I am writing about how editors gather diverse stories into collections, the same book might now function as a primary source.

Where can I find evidence?

Here are some examples of sources of information and tips about how to use them in gathering evidence. Ask your instructor if you aren’t sure whether a certain source would be appropriate for your paper.

Print and electronic sources

Books, journals, websites, newspapers, magazines, and documentary films are some of the most common sources of evidence for academic writing. Our handout on evaluating print sources will help you choose your print sources wisely, and the library has a tutorial on evaluating both print sources and websites. A librarian can help you find sources that are appropriate for the type of assignment you are completing. Just visit the reference desk at Davis or the Undergraduate Library or chat with a librarian online (the library’s IM screen name is undergradref).

Observation

Sometimes you can directly observe the thing you are interested in, by watching, listening to, touching, tasting, or smelling it. For example, if you were asked to write about Mozart’s music, you could listen to it; if your topic was how businesses attract traffic, you might go and look at window displays at the mall.

An interview is a good way to collect information that you can’t find through any other type of research. An interview can provide an expert’s opinion, biographical or first-hand experiences, and suggestions for further research.

Surveys allow you to find out some of what a group of people thinks about a topic. Designing an effective survey and interpreting the data you get can be challenging, so it’s a good idea to check with your instructor before creating or administering a survey.

Experiments

Experimental data serve as the primary form of scientific evidence. For scientific experiments, you should follow the specific guidelines of the discipline you are studying. For writing in other fields, more informal experiments might be acceptable as evidence. For example, if you want to prove that food choices in a cafeteria are affected by gender norms, you might ask classmates to undermine those norms on purpose and observe how others react. What would happen if a football player were eating dinner with his teammates and he brought a small salad and diet drink to the table, all the while murmuring about his waistline and wondering how many fat grams the salad dressing contained?

Personal experience

Using your own experiences can be a powerful way to appeal to your readers. You should, however, use personal experience only when it is appropriate to your topic, your writing goals, and your audience. Personal experience should not be your only form of evidence in most papers, and some disciplines frown on using personal experience at all. For example, a story about the microscope you received as a Christmas gift when you were nine years old is probably not applicable to your biology lab report.

Using evidence in an argument

Does evidence speak for itself.

Absolutely not. After you introduce evidence into your writing, you must say why and how this evidence supports your argument. In other words, you have to explain the significance of the evidence and its function in your paper. What turns a fact or piece of information into evidence is the connection it has with a larger claim or argument: evidence is always evidence for or against something, and you have to make that link clear.

As writers, we sometimes assume that our readers already know what we are talking about; we may be wary of elaborating too much because we think the point is obvious. But readers can’t read our minds: although they may be familiar with many of the ideas we are discussing, they don’t know what we are trying to do with those ideas unless we indicate it through explanations, organization, transitions, and so forth. Try to spell out the connections that you were making in your mind when you chose your evidence, decided where to place it in your paper, and drew conclusions based on it. Remember, you can always cut prose from your paper later if you decide that you are stating the obvious.

Here are some questions you can ask yourself about a particular bit of evidence:

• OK, I’ve just stated this point, but so what? Why is it interesting? Why should anyone care?
• What does this information imply?
• What are the consequences of thinking this way or looking at a problem this way?
• I’ve just described what something is like or how I see it, but why is it like that?
• I’ve just said that something happens—so how does it happen? How does it come to be the way it is?
• Why is this information important? Why does it matter?
• How is this idea related to my thesis? What connections exist between them? Does it support my thesis? If so, how does it do that?
• Can I give an example to illustrate this point?

Answering these questions may help you explain how your evidence is related to your overall argument.

How can I incorporate evidence into my paper?

There are many ways to present your evidence. Often, your evidence will be included as text in the body of your paper, as a quotation, paraphrase, or summary. Sometimes you might include graphs, charts, or tables; excerpts from an interview; or photographs or illustrations with accompanying captions.

When you quote, you are reproducing another writer’s words exactly as they appear on the page. Here are some tips to help you decide when to use quotations:

• Quote if you can’t say it any better and the author’s words are particularly brilliant, witty, edgy, distinctive, a good illustration of a point you’re making, or otherwise interesting.
• Quote if you are using a particularly authoritative source and you need the author’s expertise to back up your point.
• Quote if you are analyzing diction, tone, or a writer’s use of a specific word or phrase.
• Quote if you are taking a position that relies on the reader’s understanding exactly what another writer says about the topic.

Be sure to introduce each quotation you use, and always cite your sources. See our handout on quotations for more details on when to quote and how to format quotations.

Like all pieces of evidence, a quotation can’t speak for itself. If you end a paragraph with a quotation, that may be a sign that you have neglected to discuss the importance of the quotation in terms of your argument. It’s important to avoid “plop quotations,” that is, quotations that are just dropped into your paper without any introduction, discussion, or follow-up.

Paraphrasing

When you paraphrase, you take a specific section of a text and put it into your own words. Putting it into your own words doesn’t mean just changing or rearranging a few of the author’s words: to paraphrase well and avoid plagiarism, try setting your source aside and restating the sentence or paragraph you have just read, as though you were describing it to another person. Paraphrasing is different than summary because a paraphrase focuses on a particular, fairly short bit of text (like a phrase, sentence, or paragraph). You’ll need to indicate when you are paraphrasing someone else’s text by citing your source correctly, just as you would with a quotation.

When might you want to paraphrase?

• Paraphrase when you want to introduce a writer’s position, but their original words aren’t special enough to quote.
• Paraphrase when you are supporting a particular point and need to draw on a certain place in a text that supports your point—for example, when one paragraph in a source is especially relevant.
• Paraphrase when you want to present a writer’s view on a topic that differs from your position or that of another writer; you can then refute writer’s specific points in your own words after you paraphrase.
• Paraphrase when you want to comment on a particular example that another writer uses.
• Paraphrase when you need to present information that’s unlikely to be questioned.

When you summarize, you are offering an overview of an entire text, or at least a lengthy section of a text. Summary is useful when you are providing background information, grounding your own argument, or mentioning a source as a counter-argument. A summary is less nuanced than paraphrased material. It can be the most effective way to incorporate a large number of sources when you don’t have a lot of space. When you are summarizing someone else’s argument or ideas, be sure this is clear to the reader and cite your source appropriately.

Statistics, data, charts, graphs, photographs, illustrations

Sometimes the best evidence for your argument is a hard fact or visual representation of a fact. This type of evidence can be a solid backbone for your argument, but you still need to create context for your reader and draw the connections you want them to make. Remember that statistics, data, charts, graph, photographs, and illustrations are all open to interpretation. Guide the reader through the interpretation process. Again, always, cite the origin of your evidence if you didn’t produce the material you are using yourself.

Do I need more evidence?

Let’s say that you’ve identified some appropriate sources, found some evidence, explained to the reader how it fits into your overall argument, incorporated it into your draft effectively, and cited your sources. How do you tell whether you’ve got enough evidence and whether it’s working well in the service of a strong argument or analysis? Here are some techniques you can use to review your draft and assess your use of evidence.

Make a reverse outline

A reverse outline is a great technique for helping you see how each paragraph contributes to proving your thesis. When you make a reverse outline, you record the main ideas in each paragraph in a shorter (outline-like) form so that you can see at a glance what is in your paper. The reverse outline is helpful in at least three ways. First, it lets you see where you have dealt with too many topics in one paragraph (in general, you should have one main idea per paragraph). Second, the reverse outline can help you see where you need more evidence to prove your point or more analysis of that evidence. Third, the reverse outline can help you write your topic sentences: once you have decided what you want each paragraph to be about, you can write topic sentences that explain the topics of the paragraphs and state the relationship of each topic to the overall thesis of the paper.

For tips on making a reverse outline, see our handout on organization .

Color code your paper

You will need three highlighters or colored pencils for this exercise. Use one color to highlight general assertions. These will typically be the topic sentences in your paper. Next, use another color to highlight the specific evidence you provide for each assertion (including quotations, paraphrased or summarized material, statistics, examples, and your own ideas). Lastly, use another color to highlight analysis of your evidence. Which assertions are key to your overall argument? Which ones are especially contestable? How much evidence do you have for each assertion? How much analysis? In general, you should have at least as much analysis as you do evidence, or your paper runs the risk of being more summary than argument. The more controversial an assertion is, the more evidence you may need to provide in order to persuade your reader.

Play devil’s advocate, act like a child, or doubt everything

This technique may be easiest to use with a partner. Ask your friend to take on one of the roles above, then read your paper aloud to them. After each section, pause and let your friend interrogate you. If your friend is playing devil’s advocate, they will always take the opposing viewpoint and force you to keep defending yourself. If your friend is acting like a child, they will question every sentence, even seemingly self-explanatory ones. If your friend is a doubter, they won’t believe anything you say. Justifying your position verbally or explaining yourself will force you to strengthen the evidence in your paper. If you already have enough evidence but haven’t connected it clearly enough to your main argument, explaining to your friend how the evidence is relevant or what it proves may help you to do so.

Common questions and additional resources

• I have a general topic in mind; how can I develop it so I’ll know what evidence I need? And how can I get ideas for more evidence? See our handout on brainstorming .
• Who can help me find evidence on my topic? Check out UNC Libraries .
• I’m writing for a specific purpose; how can I tell what kind of evidence my audience wants? See our handouts on audience , writing for specific disciplines , and particular writing assignments .
• How should I read materials to gather evidence? See our handout on reading to write .
• How can I make a good argument? Check out our handouts on argument and thesis statements .
• How do I tell if my paragraphs and my paper are well-organized? Review our handouts on paragraph development , transitions , and reorganizing drafts .
• How do I quote my sources and incorporate those quotes into my text? Our handouts on quotations and avoiding plagiarism offer useful tips.
• How do I cite my evidence? See the UNC Libraries citation tutorial .
• I think that I’m giving evidence, but my instructor says I’m using too much summary. How can I tell? Check out our handout on using summary wisely.
• I want to use personal experience as evidence, but can I say “I”? We have a handout on when to use “I.”

Works consulted

We consulted these works while writing this handout. This is not a comprehensive list of resources on the handout’s topic, and we encourage you to do your own research to find additional publications. Please do not use this list as a model for the format of your own reference list, as it may not match the citation style you are using. For guidance on formatting citations, please see the UNC Libraries citation tutorial . We revise these tips periodically and welcome feedback.

Lunsford, Andrea A., and John J. Ruszkiewicz. 2016. Everything’s an Argument , 7th ed. Boston: Bedford/St Martin’s.

Miller, Richard E., and Kurt Spellmeyer. 2016. The New Humanities Reader , 5th ed. Boston: Cengage.

University of Maryland. 2019. “Research Using Primary Sources.” Research Guides. Last updated October 28, 2019. https://lib.guides.umd.edu/researchusingprimarysources .

You may reproduce it for non-commercial use if you use the entire handout and attribute the source: The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Make a Gift

Legal Dictionary

The Law Dictionary for Everyone

In its broadest definition, the term evidence refers to anything that is presented to prove something else is true or exists. In the legal system, evidence is any type of proof presented at trial , for the purpose of convincing the judge and/or jury that alleged facts of the case are true. This may include anything from witness testimony to documents, and objects, to photographs. The law provides specific rules of evidence which govern what may and may not be presented at trial. To explore this concept, consider the following evidence definition.

Definition of Evidence

• Something legally submitted to a court or other tribunal to prove or ascertain the truth of a matter.
• Something that tends to prove or disprove another thing.

1250-1300        Middle English

Gathering and Submitting Evidence

During investigation of a criminal matter, evidence is often gathered for use at trial later. The purpose of gathering various types of evidence is to determine who might be responsible for the crime. This is done by connecting evidence collected with witness statements and other information. There are certain, strict procedures by which evidence must be collected, handled, and transferred, in order for it to be considered valid at trial. The presentation of evidence at trial is governed and regulated by the jurisdiction ’s rules of evidence.

Types of Evidence

Evidence comes in many forms, as by its very definition, evidence is any thing presented to prove that something is true.

Scientific Evidence

Scientific evidence used in legal cases is evidence that is determined by scientific testing and/or observation. Because this type of evidence on its own is often indecipherable by judges and jurors, expert witnesses, experienced in the specific field in which the evidence was examined or tested, introduce and explain scientific evidence. Scientific evidence is generally accepted as a neutral source of information, and quite reliable. Scientific evidence commonly used in the modern legal system includes:

• Fingerprints
• Hair and fiber comparison
• DNA analysis
• Voice identification

Trace Evidence

Trace evidence is a form of forensic or scientific evidence, as it is evidence created when two objects come into contact with one another, or when portions of one object are left behind on another. Very specific methods are used to collect and process trace evidence, in order to maintain its integrity. These methods often involve vacuuming, brushing, taping, swabbing, shaking, and hand picking. Trace evidence may take many forms, including:

• Plant, mineral, or synthetic fibers
• Glove prints
• Paint chips
• Botanical materials
• Gunshot residue
• Explosives residue
• Volatile hydrocarbons

In order for trace evidence to be useful, investigators must have sample items from the suspect by which to compare it. For example, footprints are most useful if the suspect owns a pair of boots with tread to match the prints.

About DNA Evidence

Deoxyribonucleic acid (“DNA”) is the basic building block of life, and exists in every cell of all living organisms. Modern technology has led to the ability to examine an individual’s DNA, which has a very specific and unique pattern. DNA evidence can be used to identify or exclude individuals as suspects in a crime, as forensic investigators can examine DNA left at a crime scene, and compare it to DNA samples collected directly from a suspect to determine whether the crime scene sample belongs to the suspect or not.

DNA evidence is used as a highly accurate method of proving the guilt or innocence of suspects in some cases. In order to challenge or disprove DNA evidence, the opposing party must usually bring into question the procedures used to collect and test the evidence.

Physical Evidence

Physical evidence, sometimes referred to as “material evidence,” or “real evidence,” is any tangible object that is used to prove a fact of the case. Physical evidence includes objects, as well as documentation. Many items of physical evidence serve a joint purpose, as both physical and scientific evidence. For example, examination of a knife used in an assault (physical evidence) may yield scientific DNA evidence as well.

Testimonial Evidence

Testimonial evidence is that given by a witness under oath. Such testimony may be given verbally or in writing, under penalty of perjury . Any witness who is not testifying as an expert witness is generally limited to providing testimony only of those things of which he has personal knowledge, and may not interject opinion . Testimonial evidence is an important part of the legal process, though the opposing party may introduce additional testimony, or other evidence, to disprove or discredit a witness’ testimony.

Circumstantial Evidence

Circumstantial evidence is evidence that does not directly prove a fact, but requires some amount of reasoning, or inference , to make a point. While some people view circumstantial evidence as weak, or ineffective, it is possible to submit one or more circumstances for which the most probable conclusion leaves little doubt as to a fact of the case.

For example:

Roger is accused of breaking into a woman’s home and raping her. Although the woman cannot identify the man, as it was dark, and he wore a mask, the prosecution shows that Roger had previously made threats to the victim, his footprints were found outside the victim’s back door, fibers found caught in the broken window match those of Roger’s jacket, and Roger had been seen by neighbors in the neighborhood earlier that day. While all of these are circumstantial evidence, they add up to a logical conclusion that Roger committed the crime.

Hearsay Evidence

Hearsay evidence is a statement made out of court, whether verbally or in writing, that is introduced to prove the truth of whatever the statement asserts. In most cases, hearsay evidence is testimony by one person of what another person said. Hearsay evidence is not considered reliable, since the person who actually made the statement is not available to be questioned. Because of this, hearsay evidence is not usually accepted at trial. There are exceptions, however. For example, if a robbery victim stumbled up to Allison and said, “Victor robbed me!” before falling down unconscious, Allison’s testimony of what the victim said cannot be used to prove that Victor committed the robbery. Her testimony could, however, be used to prove that the victim was still alive and able to speak at that time.

Exculpatory Evidence

Exculpatory evidence is any evidence that is favorable to, or tends to exonerate, the defendant in a criminal proceeding. In the 1963 landmark U.S. Supreme Court case Brady v. Maryland , the Court determined that the prosecution is required to provide a defendant with any exculpatory evidence it has in its possession , custody, or control, before the defendant enters a plea , or as soon as the evidence comes into its possession, custody, or control. This includes any exculpatory evidence held by the investigatory team, such as police officers, investigators, and crime labs.

Bob is found murdered outside his home, and police find Malcom passed out in his car some miles away, a bloody knife on the ground near the vehicle. While Bob has been arrested and charged with the murder , the investigation turned up testimony of a witness who saw someone who was not Malcom fighting with Bob at the scene of the crime, but was too afraid to come forward.

Although police investigators doubt the validity of the witness’ statement, his testimony is exculpatory evidence that places doubt on Malcom’s guilt. The prosecutor is required to provide Malcom, or his attorney, this witness’ testimony.

Rules of Evidence

Federal and state rules of evidence govern how facts are proven, as well as how inferences may be made from facts and evidence introduced at trial. Laws governing rules of evidence stem from a concern over the validity of certain types of evidence, and whether the presentation of certain evidence might lead a judge or jury to jump to conclusions that are not necessarily valid. Rules of evidence typically revolve around the issues of reliability, relevance, efficiency, unfair surprise, and overall fairness to the proceedings.

To this end, the judge in a criminal proceeding has the power to exclude any evidence that poses a great risk of creating unfair prejudice due to a confusing, repetitive, or inflammatory nature. This is done to help ensure the jury receives a broad range of evidence that is not unnecessarily confusing.

Scott Peterson and the Circumstantial Evidence

On Christmas Eve, 2002, 27-year old Laci Peterson was reported missing by her husband of 5 years. Husband Scott Peterson told police that his wife, who was 8 months pregnant at the time of her disappearance, was nowhere to be found when he returned from a fishing trip 80 miles from home. While no indication of where the young woman might have gone existed, certain facts arose leading investigators to suspect Scott Peterson may have been involved in her disappearance.

Four months after she vanished, the badly decomposed remains of Lacy and her unborn child washed ashore in Richmond, California, near the marina at which Scott Peterson claimed he spent the day fishing the day Laci vanished.

Although prosecutors strongly suspected Scott Peterson was guilty of murdering his wife, there was little direct evidence connecting him to the crime. What the prosecution did have was a whole string of circumstantial evidence, including inconsistencies in Peterson’s story, his admitted affair, and a 6-inch long dark hair found on a pair of pliers in Peterson’s boat. Although the defense attempted to explain away each item of circumstantial evidence, in an effort to create reasonable doubt in the minds of the jury members, Peterson was convicted of first degree murder of his wife and unborn child.

Scott Peterson was sentenced to death, and transferred to death row in California’s San Quentin prison , where inmates spend an average of 25 years before execution.

Related Legal Terms and Issues

• Expert Witness – A witness possessing training, education, skill, or experience in a specific subject, which is beyond that of the average person, who is allowed to give an opinion at trial.
• Perjury – The willful telling of an untruth, or the giving of false testimony, after having taken an oath.
• Death Row – A prison housing unit reserved for inmates sentenced to be put to death.

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons
• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

6.2: Defining Evidence

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 67178

• Jim Marteney
• Los Angeles Valley College via ASCCC Open Educational Resources Initiative (OERI)

What is evidence? According to Reike and Sillars, ”Evidence refers to specific instances, statistics, and testimony, when they support a claim in such a way as to cause the decision maker(s) to grant adherence to that claim.” 1

Evidence is information that answers the question “ How do you know ? ” of a contention you have made. Please take that question very literally. It is often hard to tell the difference at first between telling someone what you know and telling them how you know it. To become an effective arguer in almost any context, you need to be able to ask this question repeatedly and test the answers you hear to determine the strength of the evidence.

Only experts can use phrases like "I think" or "I feel" or "I believe" as they have the qualifications needed that allow you to accept their observations. As for everyone else, we need to use evidence to support our arguments. As a critical thinker, you should rely much more on what a person can prove instead of what a person "feels."

Evidence is a term commonly used to describe the supporting material used when persuading others. Evidence gives an objective support to your arguments, and makes your arguments more than a mere collection of personal opinions or prejudices. No longer are you saying, “ I believe ” or “ I think ” or “ In my opinion .” Now you can support your assertions with evidence. Because you are asking your audience to take a risk when you attempt to persuade them, audiences will demand support for your assertions. Evidence needs to be carefully chosen to serve the needs of the claim and to reach the target audience.

An argument is designed to persuade a resistant audience to accept a claim via the presentation of evidence for the contentions being argued. Evidence establishes the amount of accuracy your arguments have. Evidence is one element of proof (the second is reasoning), that is used as a means of moving your audience toward the threshold necessary for them to grant adherence to your arguments.

Quality argumentation depends in part on the quantity and diversity of evidence. The arguer should expect audiences to not be persuaded by limited evidence or by a lack of variety/scope, evidence drawn from only one source as opposed to diverse sources. On the other hand, too much evidence, particularly when not carefully crafted, may leave the audience overwhelmed and without focus. Evidence in support of the different contentions in the argument needs to make the argument reasonable enough to be accepted by the target audience.

Challenge of Too Much Evidence

I attended a lecture years ago where the guest speaker told us that we have access to more information in one edition of the New York Times than a man in the middle ages had in his entire life time. The challenge is not finding information, the challenge is sorting through information to find quality evidence to use in our arguments and decision-making. In his book, “Data Smog, Surviving the Information Glut”, David Shenk expresses his concern in the first chapter:

“Information has also become a lot cheaper--to produce, to manipulate, to disseminate. All of this has made us information-rich, empowering Americans with the blessings of applied knowledge. It has also, though, unleashed the potential of information-gluttony...How much of the information in our midst is useful, and how much of it gets in the way? ...

As we have accrued more and more of it, information has emerged not only as a currency, but also as a pollutant."

• In 1971 the average American was targeted by at least 560 daily advertising messages. Twenty years later, that number had risen six- fold, to 3,000 messages per day.
• In the office, an average of 60 percent of each person's time is now spent processing documents.
• Paper consumption per capita in the United States tripled from 1940 to 1980 (from 200 to 600 pounds), and tripled again from 1980 to 1990 (to 1,800 pounds).
• In the 1980s, third-class mail (used to send publications) grew thirteen times faster than population growth.
• Two-thirds of business managers surveyed report tension with colleagues, loss of job satisfaction and strained personal relationships as a result of information overload.
• More than 1,000 telemarketing companies employ four million Americans, and generate $650 billion in annual sales.

Let us call this unexpected, unwelcome part of our atmosphere "data smog," an expression for the noxious muck and druck of the information age. Data smog gets in the way; it crowds out quiet moments, and obstructs much-needed contemplation. It spoils conversation, literature, and even entertainment. It thwarts skepticism, rendering us less sophisticated as consumers and citizens. It stresses us out.” 2

We need ways of sorting through this information and the first method is understanding the different types of evidence that we encounter.

Sources of Evidence

The first aspect of evidence we need to explore is the actual source of evidence or where we find evidence. There are two primary sources of evidence; primary and secondary.

Primary Sources

A primary source provides direct or firsthand evidence about an event, object, person, or work of art. Primary sources include historical and legal documents, eyewitness accounts, results of experiments, statistical data, pieces of creative writing, audio and video recordings, speeches, and art objects. Interviews, surveys, fieldwork, and Internet communications via email, blogs, tweets, and newsgroups are also primary sources. In the natural and social sciences, primary sources are often empirical studies—research where an experiment was performed or a direct observation was made. The results of empirical studies are typically found in scholarly articles or papers delivered at conferences. 3

Included in primary sources:

• Original, first-hand accounts of events, activity or time period
• Factual accounts instead of interpretations of accounts or experiments
• Results of an experiment
• Reports of scientific discoveries
• Results of scientifically based polls

Secondary Sources

Secondary sources describe, discuss, interpret, comment upon, analyze, evaluate, summarize, and process primary sources. Secondary source materials can be articles in newspapers or popular magazines, book or movie reviews, or articles found in scholarly journals that discuss or evaluate someone else's original research. 4

Included in secondary sources:

• Analyzation and interpretation of the accounts of primary sources
• Secondhand account of an activity or historical event
• Analyzation and interpretation of scientific or social research results

The key difference between the two sources is how far the author of the evidence is removed from the original event. You want to ask, " Is the author giving you a firsthand account, or a secondhand account? "

Types of Evidence

There are five types of evidence critical thinkers can use to support their arguments: precedent evidence, statistical evidence, testimonial evidence, hearsay evidence, and common knowledge evidence .

Precedent evidence is an act or event which establishes expectations for future conduct. There are two forms of precedent evidence: legal and personal.

Legal precedent is one of the most powerful and most difficult types of evidence to challenge. Courts establish legal precedent. Once a court makes a ruling, that ruling becomes the legal principle upon which other courts base their actions. Legislatures can also establish precedent through the laws they pass and the laws they choose not to pass. Once a principle of law has been established by a legislative body, it is very difficult to reverse.

Personal precedents are the habits and traditions you maintain. They occur as a result of watching the personal actions of others in order to understand the expectations for future behaviors. Younger children in a family watch how the older children are treated in order to see what precedents are being established. Newly employed on a job watch to see what older workers do in terms of breaks and lunchtime in order that their actions may be consistent. The first months of a marriage is essentially a time to establish precedent. Who does the cooking, who takes out the garbage, who cleans, which side of the bed does each person get, are precedents established early in a marriage. Once these precedents are displayed, an expectation of the other’s behavior is established. Such precedent is very difficult to alter.

To use either type of precedent as evidence, the arguer refers to how the past event relates to the current situation. In a legal situation, the argument is that the ruling in the current case should be the same as it was in the past, because they represent similar situations. In a personal situation, if you were allowed to stay out all night by your parents "just once," you can use that "just once" as precedent evidence when asking that your curfew be abolished.

Statistical evidence consists primarily of polls, surveys, and experimental results from the laboratory. This type of evidence is the numerical reporting of specific instances. Statistical evidence provides a means for communicating a large number of specific instances without citing each one. Statistics can be manipulated and misused to make the point of the particular advocate.

Don’t accept statistics just because they are numbers. People often fall into the trap of believing whatever a number says, because numbers seem accurate. Statistics are the product of a process subject to human prejudice, bias, and error. Questions on a survey can be biased, the people surveyed can be selectively chosen, comparisons may be made of non-comparable items, and reports of findings can be slanted. Take a look at all the polls that predict an election outcome. You will find variances and differences in the results.

Statistics have to be interpreted. In a debate over the use of lie detector tests to determine guilt or innocence in court, the pro-side cited a study which found that 98% of lie detector tests were accurate. The pro-side interpreted this to mean that lie detector tests were an effective means for determining guilt or innocence. However, the con-side interpreted the statistic to mean that two out of every 100 defendants in this country would be found guilty and punished for a crime they did not commit.

The great baseball announcer Vin Scully once described the misuse of statistics by a journalist by saying that “ He uses statistics like a drunk uses a lamppost, not for illumination but for support

Statistics are often no more reliable than other forms of evidence, although people often think they are. Advocates need to carefully analyze how they use statistics when attempting to persuade others. Likewise, the audience needs to question statistics that don't make sense to them.

Testimonial evidence is used for the purpose of assigning motives, assessing responsibilities, and verifying actions for past, present and future events. Testimony is an opinion of reality as stated by another person. There are three forms of testimonial evidence: eyewitness, expert-witness, and historiography.

Eyewitness testimony is a personal declaration as to the accuracy of an event. That is, the person actually saw an event take place and is willing to bear witness to that event. Studies have confirmed that eyewitness testimony, even with all of its problems, is a powerful form of evidence. There seems to be almost something "magical" about a person swearing to "tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth."

Expert-witness evidence calls upon someone qualified to make a personal declaration about the nature of the fact in question. Courts of law make use of experts in such fields as forensics, ballistics, and psychology. The critical thinker uses the credibility of another person to support an argument through statements about the facts or opinions of the situation.

What or who qualifies as an expert witness? Does being a former military officer make them an expert in military tactics? Often an advocate will merely pick someone who they know the audience will accept. But as an audience we should demand that advocates justify the expertise of their witness. As we acquire more knowledge, our standards of what constitutes an expert should rise. We need to make a distinction between sources that are simply credible like well-known athletes and entertainers that urge you to buy a particular product, and those who really have the qualities that allow them to make a judgment about a subject in the argumentative environment.

Although expert witness testimony is an important source of evidence, such experts can disagree. In a recent House Energy and Commerce subcommittee, two experts gave opposite testimony, on the same day, on a bill calling for a label on all aspirin containers warning of the drug's often fatal link to Reye's Syndrome. The head of the American Academy of Pediatrics gave testimony supporting the link, but Dr. Joseph White, President of The Aspirin Foundation of America, said there was insufficient evidence linking aspirin to Reye’s syndrome.

Historiography is the third form of testimonial evidence. In their book, ARGUMENTATION AND ADVOCACY, Windes and Hastings write, "Historiographers are concerned in large part with the discovery, use, and verification of evidence. The historian traces influences, assigns motives, evaluates roles, allocates responsibilities, and juxtaposes events in an attempt to reconstruct the past. That reconstruction is no wiser, no more accurate or dependable than the dependability of the evidence the historian uses for his reconstruction." 5

Keep in mind that there are many different ways of determining how history happens. Remember, historians may disagree over why almost any event happened. In the search for how things happen, we get ideas about how to understand our present world's events and what to do about them, if anything.

Primary sources are essential to the study of history. They are the basis for what we know about the distant past and the recent past. Historians must depend on other evidence from the era to determine who said what, who did what, and why.

How successful is the historian in recreating “objective reality?" As noted historian Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. says,

“The sad fact is that, in many cases, the basic evidence for the historian’s reconstruction of the really hard cases does not exist, and the evidence that does exist is often incomplete, misleading, or erroneous. Yet, it is the character of the evidence which establishes the framework within which he writes. He cannot imagine scenes for which he has no citation, invent dialogue for which he has no text, assume relationships for which he has no warrant.”

Historical reconstruction must be done by a qualified individual to be classified as historical evidence. Critical thinkers will find it useful to consider the following three criteria for evaluating historical evidence.

Around 1,000 books are published internationally every day and the total of all printed knowledge doubles every 5 years.

More information is estimated to have been produced in the last 30 years than in the previous 5,000.

----The Reuters Guide to Good Information Strategy 2000

Was the author an eyewitness to what is being described, or is the author considered an authority on the subject? Eyewitness accounts can be the most objective and valuable but they may also be tainted with bias. If the author professes to be an authority, he/she should present his/her qualifications.

Does the author have a hidden agenda? The author may purposely or unwittingly tell only part of the story. The excerpt may seem to be a straight-forward account of the situation, yet the author has selected certain facts, details, and language, which advance professional, personal or political goals or beliefs. They may be factual, but the hidden agenda of these books was to make money for the author, or get even with those in the administration they didn't like.

Does the author have a bias? The author's views may be based on personal prejudice rather than a reasoned conclusion based on facts. Critical thinkers need to notice when the author uses exaggerated language, fails to acknowledge, or dismisses his or her opponents' arguments. Historians may have biases based on their political allegiance. Conservative historians would view events differently than a liberal historian. It is important to know the political persuasion of the historian in order to determine the extent of bias he or she might have on the specific topic they are writing about.

Sometimes we think we might know our history, but Historian Daniel Boorstin puts a perspective on the ultimate validity and accuracy of historical testimony when he writes, "Education is learning what you didn't even know you didn't know." Modern techniques of preserving data should make the task of recreating the past easier and adding to our education.

Hearsay evidence (also called rumor or gossip evidence) can be defined as an assertion or set of assertions widely repeated from person to person, though its accuracy is unconfirmed by firsthand observation. "Rumor is not always wrong , " wrote Tacitus, the Roman historian. A given rumor may be spontaneous or premeditated in origin. It may consist of opinion represented as fact, a nugget of accuracy garbled or misrepresented to the point of falsehood, exaggerations, or outright, intentional lies. Yet, hearsay may well be the "best available evidence" in certain situations where the original source of the information cannot be produced.

Rumor, gossip or hearsay evidence carries proportionately higher risks of distortion and error than other types of evidence. However, outside the courtroom, it can be as effective as any other form of evidence in proving your point. Large companies often rely on this type of evidence, because they lack the capability to deliver other types of evidence.

A recent rumor was started that actor Morgan Freeman had died. A page on “Facebook” was created and soon gained more that 60,000 followers, after it was announced that the actor had passed away. Many left their condolences and messages of tribute. Only one problem, Morgan Freeman was very much alive, actually that is not so much a problem, especially to Morgan Freeman. The Internet is a very effective tool when it comes to spreading rumors.

Common knowledge evidence is also a way to support one’s arguments. This type of evidence is most useful in providing support for arguments which lack any real controversy. Many claims are supported by evidence that comes as no particular surprise to anyone.

Basing an argument on common knowledge is the easiest method of securing belief in an idea, because an audience will accept it without further challenge. As Communication Professors Patterson and Zarefsky explain:

“Many argumentative claims we make are based on knowledge generally accepted by most people as true. For example, if you claimed that millions of Americans watch television each day, the claim would probably be accepted without evidence. Nor would you need to cite opinions or survey results to get most people to accept the statement that millions of people smoke cigarettes." 6 (Patterson, 1983)

Credibility of Evidence or How Good Is It?

In order to tell us how you know something, you need to tell us where the information came from. If you personally observed the case you are telling us about, you need to tell us that you observed it, and when and where. If you read about it, you need to tell us where you read about it. If you are accepting the testimony of an expert, you need to tell us who the expert is and why she is an expert in this field. The specific identity, name or position and qualifications of your sources are part of the answer to the question “How do you know?” You need to give your audience that information.

Keep in mind that it is the person, the individual human being, who wrote an article or expressed an idea who brings authority to the claim. Sometimes that authority may be reinforced by the publication in which the claim appeared, sometimes not. But when you quote or paraphrase a source you are quoting or paraphrasing the author, not the magazine or journal. The credibility of the evidence you use can be enhanced by:

Specific Reference to Source : Does the advocate indicate the particular individual or group making the statements used for evidence? Does the advocate tell you enough about the source that you could easily find it yourself?

Qualifications of the Source: Does the advocate give you reason to believe that the source is competent and well-informed in the area in question?

Bias of the Source : Even if an expert, is the source likely to be biased on the topic? Could we easily predict the source’s position merely from knowledge of his job, her political party, or organizations he or she works for?

Factual Support: Does the source offer factual support for the position taken or simply state personal opinions as fact?

Evaluating Internet Sources of Evidence

We currently obtain a significant amount of the evidence we use in an argument from the Internet. Some people are still under the influence that if they read it on the Internet, it must be accurate. But we all know that some Internet sources are better than others. We need to be able to evaluate websites to obtain the best information possible. Here are two approaches to evaluating websites

Who, What, When, Where, and Why

This first test is based on the traditional 5 “W’s.” These questions, like critical thinking, go back to Greek and Roman times. The notable Roman, Cicero, who was in office in 63 BC, is credited with asking these questions

Journalists are taught to answer these five questions when writing an article for publication. To provide an accurate interpretation of events to their viewers or readers, they ask these five questions and we can ask the same questions to begin discovering the level of quality of an online source.

Who wrote the post? What are their qualifications?

What is actually being said in the website. How accurate is the content?

When was the website’s latest post?

Where is the source of the post? Does the URL suggest it is from an academic source or an individual?

Why is the website published? Is the website there to inform or entertain?

There is a second method of evaluating websites that is more popular and includes a more in depth analysis. This method is known as the CRAAP test.

The C.R.A.A.P. Test

C.R.A.A.P. is an acronym standing for Currency, Relevance, Authority, Accuracy, and Purpose. Developed by the Meriam Library at the California State University at Chico, each of these five areas is used to evaluate websites.

Currency How recent is this website. If you are conducting research on some historical subject a web site that has no recent additions could be useful. If, however you are researching some current news story, or technology, or scientific topic, you will want a site that has been recently updated.

Questions to Ask:

• When was the content of the website published or posted?
• Has the information been revised or updated recently?
• Have more recent articles on your subject been published?
• Does your topic require the most current information possible, or will older posts and sources be acceptable?
• Are the web links included in the website functional?
• Relevance This test of a website asks you how important is the information to the specific topic you are researching. You will want to determine if you are the intended audience and if the information provided fits your research needs.
• Does the content relate to your research topic or the question you are answering?
• Who is the intended audience?
• Is the information at an appropriate level for the purpose of your work? In other words, is it college level or targeted to a younger or less educated audience?
• Have you compared this site to a variety of other resources?
• Would you be comfortable citing this source in your research project?

Authority Here we determine if the source of the website has the credentials to write on the subject which makes you feel comfortable in using the content. If you are looking for an accurate interpretation of news events, you will want to know if the author of the website is a qualified journalist or a random individual reposting content.

• Who is the author/ publisher/ source/ sponsor of the website?
• What are the author’s credentials or organizational affiliations?
• Does the author have the qualifications to write on this particular topic?
• Can you find information about the author from reference sources or the Internet?
• Is the author quoted or referred to on other respected sources or websites?
• Is there contact information, such as a publisher or email address?
• Does the URL reveal anything about the author or source?

Accuracy In this test we attempt to determine the reliability and accuracy of the content of the website. You need to determine if you can trust the information presented in the website or is it just slanted, personal beliefs.

• Where does the information in the website come from?
• Is the information supported by Evidence, or is it just opinion?
• Has the information presented been reviewed by qualified sources?
• Can you verify any of the content in another source or personal knowledge?
• Are there statements in the website you know to be false?
• Does the language or tone used in the website appear unbiased or free of emotion or loaded language?
• Are there spelling, grammar or typographical errors in the content of the website?

Purpose Finally we examine the purpose of the website. We need to determine if the website was created to inform, entertain or even sell a product or service. If we want accurate, high quality evidence, we would want to avoid a site that is trying to sell us something. Although a company selling solar power may have some factual information about solar energy on their site, the site is geared to sell you their product. The information they provide is not there to educate you with all aspects of solar power.

• What is the purpose of the content of this website? Is the purpose to inform, teach, sell, entertain or persuade?
• Do the authors/sponsors of the website make their intentions or purpose clear?
• Is the content in the website considered facts, opinion, or even propaganda?
• Does the point of view appear objective and impartial?
• Does the author omit important facts or data that might disprove the claim being made in the post?
• Are alternative points of view presented?
• Does the content of the website contain political, ideological, cultural, religious, institutional or personal biases?

Questions used here are inspired from questions from the Meriam Library at California State University Chico, the University of Maryland University College Library and Creighton University Library

• Rieke, Richard D. and Malcolm Sillars. Argumentation and Critical Decision Making. (New York: HaperCollins Rhetoric and Society Series, 1993)
• Shenk, David. Data Smog, Surviving the Information Glut. 1. San Fransisco: HarperEdge, 1997
• Ithica College, "Primary and Secondary Sources," libguides.ithaca.edu/research101/primary (accessed October 31, 2019)
• ARGUMENTATION AND ADVOCACY. By Russel R. Windes and Arthur Hastings. New York: Random House, 1965
• Patterson, J. W. and David Zarefsky. Contemporary Debate. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1983

By Prof. Penny White

Federal Rules of Evidence

The Federal Rules of Evidence govern the introduction of evidence at civil and criminal trials in United States federal trial courts. The current rules were initially passed by Congress in 1975 after several years of drafting by the Supreme Court.  The rules are broken down into 11 articles:

• General Provisions
• Judicial Notice
• Presumptions in Civil Actions and Proceedings
• Relevancy and Its Limits
• Opinions and Expert Testimony
• Authentication and Identification
• Contents of Writings, Recordings and Photographs
• Miscellaneous Rules

This article will focus on Rule 901 — Authenticating or Identifying Evidence — and the judge’s role in the Federal Rules of Evidence.

Establish Evidentiary Foundations

Evidentiary foundations must be established before any type of evidence can be admitted. These predicates to admission apply regardless of whether the evidence is verbal or tangible, but for some types of evidence, the foundation is largely subsumed into the presentation of the evidence itself. For example, the foundation for verbal evidence is generally a requirement that the testifying witness have personal knowledge of the matter in question. This foundation is rarely established by asking the witness specifically whether he or she has personal knowledge. Rather, it is included in the witness’ testimony which discloses that the witness experienced the occurrence. But for all types of evidence, the evidentiary foundation requires authentication before other issues of admissibility are considered.

Tangible Items of Evidence

Scholars at common law recognized that authentication and identification of tangible items of evidence represented a “special aspect of relevancy.” McCormick §§179, 185; Morgan, Basic Problems of Evidence 378 (1962). Wigmore describes the need for authentication as “an inherent logical necessity.” 7 Wigmore §2129, p. 564. The authenticity requirement falls into the category of conditional relevancy – before the item of evidence becomes relevant and admissible, it must be established that the item is what the proponent claims.

Authentication of Tangible Items of Evidence

The basic codified standard for the authentication of tangible items of evidence is “evidence sufficient to support a finding that the item is what the proponent claims it is.” Fed. R. Evid. 901. It is not necessary that the court find that the evidence is what the proponent claims, only that there is sufficient evidence from which the jury might ultimately do so. This is a low threshold standard. The laws of evidence set forth the general standard, followed by illustrations and a list of several types of self-authenticated documents. The proponent of any tangible or documentary evidence has an obligation, or burden of proof, to authenticate the evidence before requesting to admit or publish it to the fact- finder; if the opponent objects to its admissibility, based on any of a collection of rules, then the proponent must address that admissibility objection as well. Thus, all evidence must be both authenticated and admissible.

Determine the Presentation of Evidence

If both authentication and admissibility are established, then the court must determine how the evidence will best be presented to the trier of fact, bearing in mind that the court is obligated to exercise control over the presentation of evidence to accomplish an effective, fair, and efficient proceeding. Under Federal Rules 611, the court’s duty is to “exercise reasonable control over the mode and order of examining witnesses and presenting evidence so as to:

• Make those procedures effective for determining the truth
• Avoid wasting time
• Protect witnesses from harassment or undue embarrassment

Sometimes tangible evidence consists of fungible items that are not identifiable by sight. For tangible evidence that is not unique or distinctive, counsel must authenticate the item by establishing a chain of custody.

Establish a Chain of Custody

A chain of custody is, in essence, a consistent trail showing the path of the item from the time it was acquired until the moment it is presented into evidence. In establishing a chain of custody, each link in the chain should be sufficiently established. However, it is not required that the identity of tangible evidence be proven beyond all possibility of doubt. Most courts hold that “when the facts and circumstances that surround tangible evidence reasonably establish the identity and integrity of the evidence, the trial court should admit the item into evidence [but] the evidence should not be admitted, unless both identity and integrity can be demonstrated by other appropriate means.” See generally State v. Cannon, 254 S.W.3d 287, 296-97 (Tenn. 2008).

Additional Rules of Evidence Considerations for Tangible Evidence

For tangible evidence, in addition to authentication, the court must consider the following.

• Relevance rules
• The hearsay rules
• The original writing rules
• When appropriate, must balance the probative value of the tangible evidence against the dangers that its introduction may cause

The court in a jury trial must also consider what method of producing the evidence to a jury is most conducive to a fair and efficient fact-finding process.

Electronic Evidence

In order to admit electronic evidence, the same rules apply, but the content of electronic electronically stored information (ESI evidence) may implicate other rules such as the opinion rules and the personal knowledge rule. Most scholars and courts agree that the issues related to the authentication and admissibility of electronic evidence simply depend on an application of the existing evidence rules. Although technical challenges may arise, the rules are flexible enough in their approach to address this new kind of evidence.

Checklist for Authenticating Evidence in Court

The Federal Rules of Evidence apply regardless of whether the evidence is submitted in a civil case or criminal trial. To ensure that evidence is authentic and admissible, follow this five-point generic checklist for the authentication of tangible, documentary, or electronic evidence:

1. Is the evidence relevant?

Does it make a fact that is of consequence to the action more or less probable than it would be without the evidence?

2. Has the evidence been authenticated?

Has the proponent produce “evidence sufficient to support a finding that the electronic evidence is what the proponent claims?”

3. Is the evidence hearsay?

Is the evidence offered to prove the truth of what it asserts? If so, does it satisfy a hearsay exception? Are confrontation rights implicated?

4. Is the evidence a writing, recording, or photograph?

Is it offered to prove the content? If so, is it either the original or a duplicate (counterpart produced by the same impression as the original, or from the same matrix, etc.) unless genuine questions of authenticity or fairness exist?

5. Is the probative value of the evidence substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence?

Of course, there are many other tools that a judge may use to rule on tangible and electronic evidence, each with its own benefits and limitations.

Penny White is the Director of the Center for Advocacy and Elvin E. Overton Distinguished Professor of Law at the University of Tennessee College of Law. She teaches in several of NJC’s evidence courses including Fundamentals of Evidence, Advanced Evidence, and Criminal Evidence.

RENO, Nev. (Jan. 26, 2024) — The nation’s oldest, largest and most widely attended school for judges �...

RENO, Nev. (Feb. 7, 2024) — National Judicial College President & CEO Benes Z. Aldana received the Am...

It’s the bear, by a clear majority. A bear to be called Bearister. January’s Question of the Month* ...

Retired attorney Rob Hunter, whose long legal career in Alabama included providing legal representation to ...

Download a PDF of our 2024 course list

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• 18 November 2020

Five rules for evidence communication

• Michael Blastland 0 ,
• Alexandra L. J. Freeman 1 ,
• Sander van der Linden 2 ,
• Theresa M. Marteau 3 &
• David Spiegelhalter 4

Michael Blastland is a board member at the Winton Centre for Risk and Evidence Communication, University of Cambridge, UK.

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Alexandra L. J. Freeman is executive director at the Winton Centre for Risk and Evidence Communication, University of Cambridge, UK.

Sander van der Linden is a board member at the Winton Centre and director of the Cambridge Social Decision-Making Lab, University of Cambridge, UK.

Theresa M. Marteau is a board member at the Winton Centre and director of the Behaviour and Health Research Unit, University of Cambridge, UK.

David Spiegelhalter is chair of the Winton Centre.

Consider what information — in what format — would best support your audiences’ decisions. Credit: Matthew Horwood/Getty

“Be persuasive”, “be engaging”, “tell stories with your science”.

Access options

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription

24,99 € / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 51 print issues and online access

185,98 € per year

only 3,65 € per issue

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Nature 587 , 362-364 (2020)

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-03189-1

White, M. P. & Eiser, J. R. in Trust in Risk Management: Uncertainty and Scepticism in the Public Mind. Ch. 4, 95–117 (Taylor & Francis, 2010).

Google Scholar  

Smith, G. D., Blastland, M. & Munafò, M. Br. Med. J. 371 , m3979 (2020).

Article   Google Scholar  

Champkin, J. Significance 10 , 23–29 (2013).

van der Bles, A. M., van der Linden, S., Freeman, A. L. J. & Spiegelhalter, D. J. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117 , 7672–7683 (2020).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Brick, C., McDowell, M. & Freeman, A. L. J. R. Soc. Open Sci. 7 , 190876 (2020).

Roozenbeek, J. & van der Linden, S. Palgrave Commun. 5 , 65 (2019).

Maertens, R., Roozenbeek, J., Basol, M. & van der Linden, S. J. Exp. Psychol. Appl . https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000315 (2020).

van der Linden, S., Leiserowitz, A., Rosenthal, S. & Maibach, E. Glob. Challenges 1 , 1600008 (2017).

Leng, G. & Leng, R. I. The Matter of Facts: Skepticism, Persuasion, and Evidence in Science (MIT Press, 2020).

Download references

Reprints and permissions

Supplementary Information

• Supplementary information updated

Related Articles

Wanted: academics wise to the needs of government

• Communication

How I harnessed media engagement to supercharge my research career

Career Column 09 APR 24

Tweeting your research paper boosts engagement but not citations

News 27 MAR 24

Divas, captains, ghosts, ants and bumble-bees: collaborator attitudes explained

Career Column 15 MAR 24

Junior Group Leader Position at IMBA - Institute of Molecular Biotechnology

The Institute of Molecular Biotechnology (IMBA) is one of Europe’s leading institutes for basic research in the life sciences. IMBA is located on t...

Austria (AT)

IMBA - Institute of Molecular Biotechnology

Open Rank Faculty, Center for Public Health Genomics

Center for Public Health Genomics & UVA Comprehensive Cancer Center seek 2 tenure-track faculty members in Cancer Precision Medicine/Precision Health.

Charlottesville, Virginia

Center for Public Health Genomics at the University of Virginia

Husbandry Technician I

Memphis, Tennessee

St. Jude Children's Research Hospital (St. Jude)

Lead Researcher – Department of Bone Marrow Transplantation & Cellular Therapy

Researcher in the center for in vivo imaging and therapy.

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

•   Home

Welcome to the   Yale Law School Legal Scholarship Repository. This repository provides open, global access to the scholarship of Yale Law School faculty and jornals, as well as a selection of unique collections. 

Communities in Yale Law School Open Scholarship Repository

Select a community to browse its collections.

Recently Added

Local Legislatures and Delegation

THE DUTY OF CLIMATE CARE

The Constitutionality of Medicare Drug-Price Negotiation under the Takings Clause

The Synergy of Legal and Medical Palliative Care: Challenges and Opportunities in Palliative MLP and the Yale Experience

Targeting Health-Related Social Risks in the Clinical Setting: New Policy Momentum and Practice Considerations

Export search results.

The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.

10 Steps for Presenting Evidence in Court

When you go to court, you will give information (called “evidence”) to a judge who will decide your case. This evidence may include information you or someone else tells to the judge (“testimony”) as well as items like email and text messages, documents, photos, and objects (“exhibits”). If you don’t have an attorney, you will need to gather and present your evidence in the proper way. Courts have rules about evidence so that judges will make decisions based on good information, not gossip and guesswork.

Although the rules can be confusing, they are designed to protect your rights, and you can use them to help you plan for your court appearance. Even though courts work differently, this publication will introduce you to the nuts and bolts of presenting evidence at a hearing. As you read it, please consider the kind of help you might want as you prepare and present your case.

With funding from the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ) developed the Implementation Sites Project to assist juvenile and family courts to integrate…

Juvenile justice system professionals are often unaware of or misinterpret the circumstances of commercially sexually exploited youths. As a result, many victims of sexual exploitation are criminalized instead of being diverted to appropriate resources and…

The technical assistance brief,  A Template Guide to Develop a Memorandum of Understanding Between a Military Installation and a Court, is a tool for courts and military installations to utilize to enter into agreements that may…

How to use evidence effectively in your next presentation

Logic and emotion are a winning combination in a presentation..

Emotion is of course crucial in a presentation.

If your presentation is pure logic, stuffed with fact after fact, evidence, and statistics, it will be difficult for your audience to relate to it.

They will be informed but disconnected. This is not a presentation they will rush to share with their colleagues or bring up in key discussions. And nor will it necessarily be particularly memorable.

A presentation hits home when an audience can relate to it, through storytelling and the personality of the presenter.

However, a presentation without evidence and logic also has its flaws. Your audience might feel warmly about your presentation but without memorable evidence to back it up they are left with nothing to hold on to afterwards.

It’s all show with no substance.

Evidence in a presentation is used to prove an argument being made by an individual or group. Alternatively, evidence can be used to disprove or refute a fact or argument people disagree with or hold to be false.

In order to persuade any internal or external audience, you need a combination of compelling evidence and effective storytelling, topped off with exceptional delivery.

So how do you bring evidence to the table?

The best way to incorporate evidence is to be selective. Quality rather than quantity. Less is more.

Instead of amassing as many facts as possible to prove your credentials, and bolster your argument, focus on a few strong ones that support your claim.

The power of 3 is a useful technique for this.

Your audience will retain three key points rather than many. Which are your three key points?

If you need ideas, we are surrounded by 3s in branding, messaging in our everyday lives. ⠀

Quick examples: ⠀⠀

Nike: ‘Just do it’⠀

McDonalds: ‘I’m loving it’⠀

Three blind mice⠀

The Holy Trinity⠀

Location location location⠀

‘See it, Say it, sorted’⠀

‘Stay home, Protect the NHS, Save lives’.

What kind of evidence is compelling and credible?

Naturally, not all evidence is equal – and what makes evidence compelling and credible will vary vastly depending on the point you are trying to make, and on your audience.

For example, if you want to demonstrate that your brand of sponge is popular to an audience of fathers, then survey results of 300 men, or the testimonial of a dad could count as great evidence.

If you are trying to persuade your audience about the dangers of a brand of sponge, that same evidence won’t cut muster. You’d need more scientifically rigorous data. A peer reviewed paper perhaps, or a quote from a leading scientist.

A few more good practices to check your evidence is reliable:

• If you’ve obtained the quote or statistic from an online list, find out where it originally came from and check if it is accurately represented. It’s easy for messages to get distorted that way, and you don’t want to be at the end of a long Telephone Game.
• In an era of fake news, double check that your source is credible. There are a few online guides to help you to detect whether you are dealing with a real or fake news story.
• Check the date. This might seem obvious, but it’s worth doing! If your topic is topical, it’s not a good look to use supporting evidence from 2004 unknowingly.

Following the above steps will support your credibility.

Make it visual

Whilst testimonials can be convincing evidence, visuals are everything in a presentation, whether offline or online.

Making your evidence come to life visually will help your audience take in your message easily and effortlessly, especially if it is supported by exceptional delivery.

Ask yourself:

• Can these statistics be turned into a chart?
• Can these survey results be represented by an image?
• What is the core message from a set of stats?

If you are sharing facts that have percentages in them, give each one its space in a slide, as with the example below.

An example of making statistics pop visually

So, there you have it – Habit 9 of The 12 Habits of Exceptional Presenters – Provide compelling and credible evidence. Evidence is used to back up or refute arguments, and it helps our audiences to make decisions at work. Using evidence allows us to work out what is effective and what is not and is critical to providing a persuasive presentation.

Want to find out more about the other 11 Habits of Exceptional Presenters?

You can download my guide to the 12 Habits of Exceptional Presenters right here.

Did you know we have a LinkedIn page and an Instagram page now? Follow us for more advice to improve your presentations!

Previous Post Why your team should invest in presentation training

Next post from boring to brilliant: execute an exceptional online powerpoint presentation, contact jeremy:.

+44 (0)1903 918654 Email LinkedIn Instagram

Quick Links:

GDPR Privacy Policy Cookie Policy

Subscribe and get my monthly email:

For tips on becoming an exceptional speaker or presenter, register for my regular email ‘Speaking Up’

Home Coaching Approach One-to-one coaching Online presentation course Group training Insights Contact

© 2024 Jeremy Cassell Coaching. All Rights Reserved. Jeremy Cassell Coaching is the trading name of RTPC Limited, company number 4578127

• Coaching Approach
• Jeremy Cassell’s Books
• Keynote speaking
• One-to-one Coaching
• Group Training
• Virtual Keynote
• Virtual Presenting
• Preview course
• Buying for Groups
• Testimonials
• Whitepapers
• Overcoming nerves
• Engaging your Audience
• Newsletter Sign-up

• Cambridge Dictionary +Plus

presentation of evidence

Meanings of presentation and evidence.

Your browser doesn't support HTML5 audio

(Definition of presentation and evidence from the Cambridge English Dictionary © Cambridge University Press)

• Examples of presentation of evidence

Word of the Day

pitch-perfect

singing each musical note perfectly, at exactly the right pitch (= level)

Alike and analogous (Talking about similarities, Part 1)

Learn more with +Plus

• Recent and Recommended {{#preferredDictionaries}} {{name}} {{/preferredDictionaries}}
• Definitions Clear explanations of natural written and spoken English English Learner’s Dictionary Essential British English Essential American English
• Grammar and thesaurus Usage explanations of natural written and spoken English Grammar Thesaurus
• Pronunciation British and American pronunciations with audio English Pronunciation
• English–Chinese (Simplified) Chinese (Simplified)–English
• English–Chinese (Traditional) Chinese (Traditional)–English
• English–Dutch Dutch–English
• English–French French–English
• English–German German–English
• English–Indonesian Indonesian–English
• English–Italian Italian–English
• English–Japanese Japanese–English
• English–Norwegian Norwegian–English
• English–Polish Polish–English
• English–Portuguese Portuguese–English
• English–Spanish Spanish–English
• English–Swedish Swedish–English
• Dictionary +Plus Word Lists

{{message}}

There was a problem sending your report.

• Definition of presentation
• Definition of evidence
• Other collocations with presentation
• Other collocations with evidence

• Original Article
• Open access
• Published: 02 March 2020

Experiences of evidence presentation in court: an insight into the practice of crime scene examiners in England, Wales and Australia

• K. Sheppard   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0806-7077 1 ,
• S. J. Fieldhouse 2 &
• J. P. Cassella 2  

Egyptian Journal of Forensic Sciences volume  10 , Article number:  8 ( 2020 ) Cite this article

13k Accesses

6 Citations

1 Altmetric

Metrics details

The ability to present complex forensic evidence in a courtroom in a manner that is fully comprehensible to all stakeholders remains problematic. Individual subjective interpretations may impede a collective and correct understanding of the complex environments and the evidence therein presented to them. This is not fully facilitated or assisted in any way with current non-technological evidence presentation methods such as poor resolution black and white photocopies or unidimensional photographs of complex 3D environments. Given the wide availability of relatively cheap technology, such as tablets, smartphones and laptops, there is evidence to suggest that individuals are already used to receiving visually complex information in relatively short periods of time such as is available in a court hearing. courtrooms could learn from this more generic widespread use of technology and have demonstrated their ability to do so in part by their adoption of the use of tablets for Magistrates. The aim of this current study was to identify the types of digital technology being used in courts and to obtain data from police personnel presenting digital evidence in court.

A questionnaire study was conducted in this research to explore current technology used within courtrooms from the perspective of crime scene personnel involved in the presentation of complex crime scene evidence. The study demonstrated that whilst many of the participants currently utilize high-end technological solutions to document their crime scenes, such as 360° photography or laser scanning technologies, their ability to present such evidence was hindered or prevented. This was most likely due to either a lack of existing technology installed in the court, or due to a lack of interoperability between new and existing technology.

This study has contributed to this academic field by publishing real life experiences of crime scene examiner’s, who have used advanced technology to record and evaluate crime scenes but are limited in their scope for sharing this information with the court due to technological insufficiency. Contemporary recording techniques have provided the opportunity for further review of crime scenes, which is considered to be a valuable property over previous documentation practice, which relied upon the competency of the investigator to comprehensively capture the scene, often in a single opportunity.

Introduction

The delivery of evidence in the UK Courts of Law in part involves extensive oral descriptions of events and evidence from an investigation, which can be a time consuming and laborious task (Schofield 2016 ). In terms of evidence relating to a crime scene, verbal statements, printed photographs and sketches of the scene may be used (Lederer 1994 ; McCracken 1999 ).

Conveying evidence from a scene, which both experts and laypersons can fully understand, remains an “ever-difficult task” (Chan 2005 ). This is because individuals may misinterpret or find difficulty in understanding the information being described to them (Schofield and Fowle 2013 ). It is entirely likely that cognitive processes contribute to variance in the interpretation of the evidence amongst listeners, and perhaps unsurprisingly, a survey conducted by the American Bar Association ( 2013 ) has demonstrated that significant volumes of technical information or complex facts can not only overwhelm the jury, but also often confuses them, leaving them feeling bored and frustrated (Kuehn 1999 ; Schofield 2009 ). In turn, this can present difficulties in absorbing and retaining information (Krieger 1992 ). Lederer and Solomon ( 1997 ) noted an increase in people’s attention when moving object displays were used in the courtroom.

There have been research studies which have investigated and considered the effects and impact that evidence presentation methods may have on jurors’ decisions in the courtroom (Schofield 2016 ; Schofield and Fowle 2013 ; Dahir 2011 ; Kassin and Dunn 1997 ; Dunn et al. 2006 ; Schofield 2011 ). Alternative research has started to develop our understanding of the effects that technology may have on jurors and the decisions which they make in the courtroom (Burton et al. 2005 ). Whilst visual presentation methods offer significant advantages in presenting complex evidence in an understandable way, research would suggest that such methods could also mislead, or unfairly persuade a jury (Schofield 2016 ; Burton et al. 2005 ).

Manlowe ( 2005 ) details the practical considerations which need to be made before introducing visual presentations into the courtroom, such as whether the technology installed permits graphical displays to be presented. Manlowe ( 2005 ) advocates the use of visual evidence in the courtroom in combination with oral presentations, as it has been found that jurors can retain six times as much information when compared with just oral presentations alone. Schofield and Fowle ( 2013 ) also extensively described the advantages and disadvantages associated with different graphical technologies for presenting evidence in the courtroom, and provided guidelines for using such evidence.

Given the availability of technical devices, such as tablets, smartphones and laptops, there is some evidence to suggest that individuals are used to receiving high-impact information in relatively short periods of time (Manlowe 2005 ; Pointe 2002 ). This information is highly visual, and as it utilizes technology might suggest that members of the court, including the jury, are equipped for a shift towards an increase in the quantity of visual data and technological advancement. It might also suggest that traditional methods of presenting evidence relating to a crime scene, such as sketches and photographs lack the flexibility and ability to deliver the intended information in a comprehensive manner. According to Manlowe ( 2005 ), basic demonstrative exhibits in the courtroom were time consuming and expensive and were limited in their ability to be edited. Technological advancements in the presentation of crime scene evidence include scene recording and visualization (Schofield 2016 ). Such technology ultimately aims to facilitate effective and rapid communication of crime scene environments between users within law enforcement agencies and in court (O’Brien and Marakas 2010 ; Manker 2015 ).

The presentation of forensic evidence using reconstructed virtual environments, such as computer-generated (CG) displays and virtual reality (VR) have been developed through the necessity to improve jurors’ understanding of complex evidence without technical, jargon-filled explanations. It is thought that jurors place more credibility on what they can “see and touch” (Schofield 2009 ). Virtual environments present unique opportunities to visually illustrate a scene, with the ability to “walk through” and virtually interact with the environment, and this can be more compelling for juries (Agosto et al. 2008 ; Mullins 2016 ). Howard et al. ( 2000 ) explored the use of virtual reality to create 3D reconstructions of crime scenes and demonstrated that the system they introduced made the evidence being presented to them easier to comprehend, and substantially shortened the length of trials.

Panoramic photography is another means of technological advancement that has been used to aid the presentation of crime scene evidence. In 2014, a 360° panorama was used to demonstrate material as part of a murder trial. The jury in Birmingham experienced a virtual “walk through” of a scene for a murder trial, created using an iSTAR® panoramic camera (NCTech). Warwickshire Police have used an iSTAR® camera to document serious road traffic collisions (RTCs), which contributed to the evidence revealed during the trial of Scott Melville for the murder of Sydney Pavier. Principal Crown advocate of the Crown Prosecution Service, Peter Grieves Smith commended the technology used stating “It was invaluable footage that greatly assisted the jury in understanding the layout of the property. It will surely become the norm to use this in the future in the prosecution of complex and grave crime”. Judge Burbidge QC also commended Warwickshire Police for their professional pursuit of justice in this case.

Reportedly, the state of courtroom technology integration differs significantly around the world (Manker 2015 ; Reiling 2010 ; Ministry of Justice 2013 ). Basic technology, such as tablets and television screens are being used within some courtrooms in the USA and Australia (Schofield 2011 ) with a limited number integrating more high-end technological solutions, such as CG presentations in the USA (Chan 2005 ). The integration of technology within the UK courtrooms is still in its infancy and is a significantly slower process than the USA or Australia (Schofield 2016 ). As part of a strategic new plan introduced in 2014, the UK criminal justice system was due to be transformed through digital technology. The plan sought to make courtrooms “digital by default” with an end to the reliance on paper by 2016, and to provide “swifter justice” through the digital dissemination of information (Ministry of Justice 2013 ). The ultimate aim was to digitize the entire UK criminal justice system by 2020, to simplify processes and improve efficiency. In 2013, Birmingham’s Magistrates court produced the UK’s first digital concept court, a courtroom that trialled technology to aid in the speed and efficiency of trials using laptops to store electronic case files as opposed to large paper folders, and to facilitate the sharing of files with other members of the courtroom.

In 2016, the UK National Audit Office conducted an investigation to determine the current situation of courtrooms in terms of the digital reform. Results demonstrated how some parts of the criminal justice system were still heavily paper based, creating inefficiencies. The report concluded that the time frames that were originally employed, were overambitious (National Audit Office 2016 ).

The aim of this study was to explore the current situation regarding technology use in courtrooms from the perspective of persons involved in the presentation of crime scene evidence, and to explore barriers and facilitators to its greater and effective use. In this study, the following objectives were considered: to establish the state of current literature associated with the use of technology in courtrooms; to obtain data regarding the experiences of the UK police service personnel with respect to presenting digital evidence in courtrooms; to identify the types of technology that are currently being utilized in courtrooms in the UK; to seek the opinions of police service personnel with regard to digital technology use in the courtrooms and to use these outcomes to define a fresh starting point to debate the exploitation of digital technology use in the UK courtrooms to facilitate more efficient, better value for money and robust judgements with complex forensic content.

The study has focused on the experiences of crime scene personnel because of the advancements of technology in this particular area, such as the use of 360° photography and laser scanning. The subject area also falls within the remit of the research team. By sharing opinions and experience, the paper hopes to aid both legal professionals and police service personnel to a more comprehensive understanding of the current use of technology in the courtroom, the advantages which technology can provide to their case, and the barriers which have been affecting the adoption of technology.

Participant questionnaires

A qualitative phenomenological research study was conducted to explore the experiences of police service personnel regarding the current use of information technology in courtrooms and in their experience of evidence presentation. The sample group included vehicle collision investigators and forensic photographers/imaging technicians. A snowball sample of 21 police service personnel from England and Wales and Australia were recruited via email and a UK police forum for participation within this study. It was considered useful to recruit participants from these countries because of the similarities with their respective criminal justice systems (McDougall 2016 ) but where differences in the rate of technology integration had also been previously reported (Schofield 2016 ) which could offer meaningful and experience based solutions in technological advancement.

Participants were required to formally consent to participation in line with the ethical requirements of the host institution. Participants were emailed a semi-structured, open-ended questionnaire and were asked to type or handwrite their responses. The questions asked were as follows:

What is your job title and role within the criminal justice system?

As part of your role, are you required to present evidence in a courtroom?

Can you tell me what, if any, technology has been integrated into the courtroom?

What has your experience been in terms of the introduction of new technology into the courtroom?

Have there been any difficulties with technology being integrated into the courtroom?

With the implementation of technology with existing and current courtroom systems?

And whether there have been barriers, if any, to the adoption of such technology?

If there has not, why do you think this is?

In terms of the current methods with which forensic evidence is presented in court, do you think anything needs to be changed? Please explain.

What has your experience been with the presentation of evidence in court? Please explain.

New technology is becoming available to police services and forensic services for the documentation and presentation of crime scenes. 360° photography or laser scanning is being implemented into police services to speed up the data capture as well as to capture more detail and information from the scene.

Have you had any experience in this area—do you yourself use these methods for documenting crime scenes?

Have you ever had to present this type of evidence in court? Please explain.

What has the response been to this method of presenting evidence

From the judges?

Barristers?

The jury members?

Is the courtroom fully equipped to allow you to present this type of evidence? Please explain.

Do you feel there is anything, which needs improvement? Please explain.

Can you give me your opinion on presenting evidence in this manner? Advantages/disadvantages.

Data analysis

Thematic analysis based on Manker ( 2015 ) methodology, originally adapted from Guest et al. ( 2012 ), was used to analyse the data that was collected from the 21 participants. The data analysis consisted of breaking down and coding the text responses obtained from the participants’ questionnaires, to identify themes and to construct thematic networks. A computer software program NVivo was used to store, organize and code the open-ended data collected from participants. Participant text responses were re-structured within an Excel spread sheet and the data set uploaded into the NVivo software. The data was explored using the NVivo software through word frequency queries to analyse the most frequently used words in the participant data. Emerging themes were identified and coded using specific keywords or “nodes”. Nodes were created based on these recurring themes, and any responses were coded at the relevant nodes. For example, for question 11 which asked the participants “What has the response been to this method of presenting evidence”, potential responses from participants could suggest a good response, a bad response, little response, no response or not applicable. These identified nodes would allow the researcher to link a node to the relevant response from participants. Within the NVivo software, the researcher could search nodes and easily identify all participants who had the same response. This was used to analyse the different themes identified within the participant data. As the analysis of the data progressed, new nodes were identified and these were checked against all other participants.

Thematic categories were determined by the researchers: to include courtroom technology, ease of use, implementation, limited use, recommendations, advantages and disadvantages. Some of the thematic categories were further broken down to include additional related categories. For example, courtroom technology was further broken down to include specific categories such as television screens, audio-visual technology, computers, 360° photography and laser scanning.

The nodes were associated with the thematic categories described above. The participant responses were analysed, described and tables created which documented the number of respondents to have reported such a response relevant to the nodes. The nodal frequency within each theme was used to determine the existence of trends within the data.

Results and discussion

The purpose of this qualitative phenomenological research study was to explore and describe experiences of police service personnel with responsibilities within crime scene examination with regard to the current use of technology within the courtroom. This research covered over one third of the total 43 police services within England and Wales (15 services), as shown in Fig.  1 . Each police service has their own policy and procedures for conducting criminal investigations and as such different individuals within the same police service would likely follow the same procedures.

Map to show the 15 police service regions represented by the participants who completed the questionnaire (highlighted in purple). Adapted from original by HMIC

Although the use of questionnaires allowed exploration of the participants’ experiences regarding the use of technology in the courtroom, they restricted further explanation or prompts for more detail which would be available in interviews. The authors accept that participant responses to questions that are likely to change based on different stimuli, such as the context of the request and their mood, in addition to what information they could recall from memory at that particular time. Consequently, participants may not recollect a particular experience or event at the time that they completed the questionnaire, and as a result may not mention it. In response to this, the paper presents a thematic analysis of the data, where collective themes are presented based on responses from the entire sample group rather than isolated incidents.

A consideration for the authors throughout the study related to the opportunities for participants to respond to questions in a manner that would be viewed favourably. This is termed “social desirability bias” (Manker 2015 ; Saris and Gallhofer 2014 ). As a result, participants may have been inclined to over exaggerate “good behaviour” or under report “bad behaviour”. Reportedly, the effects of social desirability bias is reduced in situations where an interviewer is not present, which is why, in part, the experimental design included questionnaire data. When the data was analysed, six themes were identified. These were “current technology in the courtroom”, “lack of technology in the courtroom”, “difficulties/barriers associated with the integration of technology into the courtroom”, “improvements/changes that are required”, “the future of courtroom technology” and “360° photography and laser scanning”.

Theme 1: Technology used in the courtroom

Within the first theme, participants were asked about their experiences of technology within the courtroom, which prompted responses that described the use of television screens, DVD players/CCTV viewing facilities, basic PC’s/laptops, paper files, photographs, basic audio-visual systems, live link capability, projectors and the specialist software to view 3D data. Four participants described how the current technology within the courtroom was limited to that of traditional paper files and printed albums of photographs. Given the use of the term “technology” within the question, the answers that were given were perceived to describe very basic methods, and some of the participants equally commented that “the courts need to catch up”. Those courtrooms that had initiated technology into trials had implemented what many participants claimed to be “basic and limited audio-visual technology” .

The UK National Audit Office ( 2016 ) identified that courtrooms have been slow to adopt technology and still heavily rely on paper files, which has worked for many years. The experiences described by the participants in this study would support these findings. The reason paper files have worked for many years could be attributed to the fact that people like to have something in their hands that they can see in front of them. Paper files and photographs allow a jury to look closely and examine what they are being shown, compared with distance viewing of a screen. However, printing photographs often leads to a loss in clarity and detail, which could make it more difficult to interpret what they are seeing. Often, it is the case that something may be visible on screen in a digital photograph that is not visible once recreated through print.

According to the data, the type of court and crime was a factor which determined whether any technology was implemented, and the type of technology that was implemented. For one participant, the majority of their cases were produced for the coroner’s courts, who were reportedly “yet to embrace” new evidential technology. It was also noted, however, that although slow to embrace technology, in the majority of cases at the coroner’s court, it was not needed.

Theme 2: Lack of technology in the courtroom

According to the results of this study, little technology had reportedly been implemented into the courtrooms. One participant stated that, “there has been little investment by the courts in modern technology” and “generally there hasn’t been any [implementation] and under investment seems to have been the greatest problem”.

Some of the participants described how limited technology had negatively impacted upon their ability to appropriately present evidence in court. In one instance the following scenario was described:

I was presenting evidence on blood spatter in court. The jury were looking at photocopies taken from the album of blood spatter on a door. So I had to ask the jury to accept that there were better quality images where the spatter could be seen and I was able to interpret the pattern. Not only does this allow a barrister to claim I was making it up but, it is much easier to explain something if people can see it.

A similar experience was reported by another participant, who took personal measures to aid their presentation of evidence:

I had to show each individual juror an original printed photograph from the report I had brought with me as those provided in their bundle were of such poor quality that the subject of my oral evidence was not clearly visible to them.

Primarily evidence is verbal, [and that the] presentation of photographs are by way of rather dodgy photocopied versions lovingly prepared by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS).

The significance of these statements relates to the potential for the evidence under presentation to be misunderstood or unfairly dismissed, which has implications for the case. These experiences would suggest that the most basic opportunities to provide equivalent quality photographs to the jury were missed. Forensic evidence is often highly visual, and even with an articulate speaker and extensive descriptive dialogue, the ability to effectively communicate the appearance and location of evidence such as blood spatter is likely to be strengthened by effective visual aids. Aside from high quality photographs, alternative digital presentation methods, such as portable screening devices may have provided an appropriate and just communication of the evidence.

Burton et al. ( 2005 ) and Schofield ( 2016 ) each made reference to the effects of visual presentation methods on jurors’ interpretation of evidence. In this research, reference has been made to actual evidence and not reconstructed scenarios; therefore, in our opinion, visual presentation opportunities to illustrate complex evidence such as blood spatter is only likely to improve jurors’ understating of the evidence being presented to them. It may also improve jurors’ retainment of information, as demonstrated by Manlowe ( 2005 ).

Paper files in the courtroom are still heavily relied upon, with the UK’s Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) producing roughly 160 million sheets of paper every year (Ministry of Justice 2013 ). In addition to the limited presentation quality of photocopied images, printed copies of two dimensional presentations were also criticized in terms of their inability to interact with jury members, as follows:

Tend to be clumsy and fill the witness box with paper that is pointed to in front of the witness and this is never conveyed to the jury.

If, maybe through the use of tablets, or some form of interactive media, this could be displayed on screen, then the witnesses’ thoughts and explanations may be better conveyed to the jury.

For other participants, the use of printed paper was seemingly appropriate:

For most cases, a simple 2D plan and photographs is more than sufficient. There is the ability to produce flashy reconstruction DVD’s, but I think there is a huge danger of a reconstruction showing things that did not happen, putting images to the court and jury that may only be a representation of a possible scenario rather than what is definite. This is particularly true for collision investigation where there are often unknowns and using a computer model cannot be certain that is what happened. Videos shown are talked through as they are run.

In this instance, the opposite explanation appears to be true. Here, the participant is suggesting that technology could facilitate the presentation of inappropriate and misrepresenting evidence, equally impacting negatively on the case. This would reasonably support the idea that the use of technology should be considered in the context of the evidence under presentation, and/or used in instances where facts are being communicated. The experiences described by this participant implied that the photographs that they had used had adequately supported the presentation of their evidence.

In cases where multiple types of evidence were being presented, the need for technology reportedly varied, but its availability was also restricted for some participants.

One participant described,

to date, I haven’t used any visual aids/props. Generally, I will have compiled a report, which contains photographs and a scale plan, but as part of the wider investigation there may be digital data such as CCTV footage, 3D laser scans and animated reconstructions. My evidence is given orally and the relevant sections of the jury bundle referred to for context. I have presented a case involving CCTV footage which was played on too small a screen for the jurors to see properly, therefore making it difficult for them to understand the intricacies of what it showed. The footage itself had to be provided in a format that could be played in a DVD player present in the courtroom, leading to an overall reduction in quality.

The restrictive nature of this environment for the presentation of CCTV evidence is surprising in a society that thrives on visual media. In this example, the presentation of evidence has been compromised for the cost of a larger screen, or the distribution of visual display devices, such as tablets. In terms of operation, these devices simply need to facilitate functions such as “play”, “stop” and “pause”. If there is a concern that jury members may be unable to comply, there are options to screen mirror devices, thus giving control to a single competent user. It was reported by an Australian participant that some courtrooms already had individual screens for each jury member. Many courtrooms in the USA had also installed multiple computer screens or individual tablets for the jury so that evidence was more easily viewed (Schofield 2016 ; Wiggins 2006 ).

One of the UK participants claimed that,

until the improvement of the visual aids for the jury i.e. much larger or closer/individual monitors are implemented even the products we provide at the moment are of limited use in the courtroom.

Any concern over difficulties with technology operation by jury members should be considered alongside the fact that according to the Office of Communications (Ofcom), in 2017, 76% of adults living in the UK had a smartphone; therefore, the authors question whether courtroom technological advancement should account for this and look at the cultural shift in technology. This was supported with the data, where a participant made reference to the introduction of technology into the courtroom stating how it can

depend very much on the attitudes of the judge, prosecutors and investigators. Some are technologically averse whilst others are happy to accommodate new technology.

In the USA, the courtroom 21 project (founded in 1993) has sought to address issues with technology integration into courtrooms by active research, demonstrating the software and hardware to users, as well as discussing ideas for use in court. This could be a useful learning opportunity for alternative justice systems moving forward, given that an evaluation of US courts in Rawson ( 2004 ) revealed some similarity between the US and UK current practice. There is some evidence to suggest that evidence presentation in the USA is similarly restricted by technological advancement.

The use of live links or videoconferencing, which allows expert witnesses to present their testimony off site was reported by two participants. This type of technology is widely used within courtrooms by police officers that can remain working until required to present evidence, to interview vulnerable witnesses, and to arrange suitable dates for a defendant’s trial. This is believed to save time and money transporting defendants to the courtroom location for hearings.

Theme 3: Difficulties/barriers associated with the integration of technology into the courtroom

This study highlighted some of the difficulties participants had experienced with the integration of technology into the courtroom and problems arising with the already installed basic courtroom equipment. One participant described,

people always seem to be finding their feet when trying to play with digital evidence, making things connect and work. Also, the actual devices are not always reliable

A lack of training and knowledge regarding existing technology was identified by several participants. One participant described the frustrations of the situations when technology was not operated correctly, describing,

the court clerk always seems to have difficulty getting the existing system to work correctly, albeit a DVD player. It is a great source of frustration for all involved.

we occasionally use video footage, which has to be converted to DVD format to play at court –assuming the usher knows how to work it.

This raises a training issue within courtrooms, which was supported by the Rt Hon Sir Brian Leveson in his review of efficiency in criminal proceedings (Leveson 2015 ). In this document, the Rt Hon Sir Brian Leveson highlighted the requirement for judges, court staff and those individuals who have regular access to courtroom technology to be sufficiently trained. In addition, he highlighted the need for technical assistance to prevent underutilisation of technology due to technological failures, or defective equipment, which often delay proceedings (Leveson 2015 ). In 2014, 13 cases in Crown court and 275 in Magistrates were postponed because of problems with technology. The National Audit Office ( 2016 ) reported that the police had so little faith in the courts equipment that they hired their own at a cost of £500 a day.

Issues regarding the compatibility of technology in the courtroom and a lack of staff training are not restricted to the UK. A report generated by the Attorney General of New South Wales, Australia, identified the same issues arising from technology in the courtroom (Leveson 2015 ; NSW Attorney Generals Department 2013 ).

Participants’ reported lack of investment/funding as the most commonly occurring “barrier”. According to one participant,

Under investment seems to have been the greatest problem; we have the opportunity to bring 3D interactive virtual scenes to the courtroom for example, however the limited computing power available means that this is impossible and there is little or no will on the part of the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) to invest in this technology.

CPS protocol is resistant to change and it also requires funding.

This supports the work of Manker ( 2015 ), who found that participants considered cost of equipment to be the main reason for the limited use of technology. Although technology may be expensive to purchase in the first instance, the significant returns should outweigh the initial expenditure. For example, technology aided trials may aid juries in understanding evidence, reaching a verdict and thus bringing the case to a close more quickly, reducing case costs and allowing more trials to be conducted concurrently (Marder 2001 ). In addition, there are benefits that cannot be quantified, such as juror satisfaction and engagement through the use of technology over laborious descriptions.

Barriers can also include a resistance to change or a lack of acceptance. One participant commented on the reluctance of individuals to accept new technology;

barriers include reluctance of some judges, investigators and lawyers to consider or implement newer technologies into their investigation or courtroom presentation … these challenges are reducing as time progresses and the technologies are increasingly established and the general paradigm is altered.

In some circumstances it may be necessary to integrate newer systems alongside, or in conjunction with, already existing equipment effectively. In many cases, the technologies may not be compatible, as evidenced through one participant’s response, who described,

the current systems seem incapable of keeping up with the advance on modern technologies or simply do not work more often than not.

Leveson ( 2015 ) found that many judges were in favour of exploiting technology in order to aid in the efficiency of the criminal justice system but had doubts regarding the ability to adapt current technology and its capacity to undertake its current duties.

This is not seemingly consistent with some participants’ experiences of technology outside of the courtroom, but within their investigative roles fear of technology and change also presents a barrier to the adoption of technology, particularly the risks associated with such technological change. Some changes may be successful, and others may not, but until these changes are made, it is impossible to know the outcomes of the technology use and what it can provide to the courtroom (Marder 2001 ).

There is some suggestion that technological change within courtrooms will be adopted. A report by the Ministry of Justice ( 2016 ) explains how the entire UK criminal justice system is being digitized to modernize courts using £700 million government funding. The funding aims to create a new online system that will link courts together. The digitisation of the UK criminal justice system is due to be completed in 2019, and an influx of funding should enable more rapid adoption of technology into the courtrooms.

Theme 4: Improvements/changes required to facilitate technological integration

Seven participants commented that no change in the courtroom was necessary with regards to technology. For example,

I think current methods are sufficient and like I said anything more complicated we provide our own laptop for.

As discussed, the technological requirements for evidence presentation are case specific, which is likely to be more prevalent in areas that utilize technology such as 360° photography and laser scanning.

Eight participants commented that a significant technological upgrade was required within courtrooms to cope with the ever-increasing demand of technology. This was emphasized in the following quotes:

The majority of courtrooms need a radical update. I’d hope that those being built now incorporate the required technology; however, I wouldn’t count on it,

the courts need full modernising,

the basic court infrastructure needs upgrading to allow it to handle the significant increase in demand that comes with the use of 3D animations software,

the court process has changed very little in the 12 years I have been a collision investigator whilst the equipment we use and evidence we produce has changed exponentially.

The adoption of technology to aid with the documentation and recovery of evidence from crime scenes by police services can only support effective evidence presentation with the alignment of such technological advancements in the courtroom. Failure to align technology could mean that such evidence is unlikely to be presented in its most effective format. This change could be alleviated with the standardization of file formats. According to one participant,

standardisation of digital formats used in the courtrooms would help in the preparation of evidence knowing which format to use when supplying evidence, to police and the courts. The most common remark we get from police and the courts regarding digital file formats is “can you supply or convert this or these files to a usable format, we just need it to be playable in court”.

Theme 5: courtrooms of the future

Participants were asked about their thoughts on the future of evidence presentation. Virtual reality (VR) featured within several responses, with the idea being that courtroom users could be transported to a scene, allowing them to view and navigate themselves through it in 3D. Research has been conducted to investigate the use of VR courtrooms, whereby jurors wear VR headsets and are transported to the crime scene, allowing them to explore the scene (Bailenson et al. 2006 ; Schofield 2007 ).

In this study, one participant commented that,

When presenting evidence in an innovative way it generally means in a way that is better for the jury to understand, and that means clarity.

This will provide the ability for jurors, judges and the coroner to revisit a scene without leaving the courtroom and see things from the perspective of various people involved (victim, accused, witnesses).

In terms of its overall aim, one participant commented,

The aim is surely to assist the jury with understanding the complexities of the crime scene and to do that they need to be able to visualise the location and the evidence identified within it so I believe the future of a courtroom will be to provide this as realistically as possible.

This participant does not state what technology will be used to provide this experience to the jury only that the visual evidence will need to be as realistic as possible.

The effectiveness of VR technology for evidence presentation is likely to encourage debate, given the clarity with which crime scenes can be presented, but with the consideration of contextual information and its effects on juror response.

There will however be a fine line between giving a jury enough information with which to make an informed decision and traumatising them in vivid technicolour. Technology should not be adopted for the sake of it as this could have profound effects on the trials outcome. Any evidence presented in a courtroom needs to describe the incident that occurred in a manner which is easily understandable.

Although the perceived benefits of the technology were discussed by some, other participants commented on how VR was “still a long way off from being used for evidence”. Issues regarding the persuasive impact of demonstrative evidence have already been explicitly expressed with regard to 360° photography and laser scanning (Narayanan and Hibbin 2001 ). Other researchers claim that such evidence can lead a jury to blindly believe and accept the evidence, as shown in the work of Schofield and Fowle ( 2013 ) and Selbak ( 1994 ). Consequently, the use of visual presentation using CG could have profound implications on the case outcome if the jurors instantly believe what they are seeing. Evidence presented in such a way must remain scientifically accurate and truthfully reflect the scientific data and augment witness testimony (Manker 2015 ). This was supported by participant comments regarding the probative value of the evidence. Here,

the probity value is yet to be determined, in addition to juries not being allowed on many occasions to witness certain graphic images for fear of being overly influenced. Virtual reality would compound this.

Another participant commented that,

it may be perceived as entertainment rather than a judicial process.

Theme 6: 360° photography and laser scanning

Given the considerable amount of technology available with respect to crime scene documentation, such as 360° photography and laser scanning, and the expertise of the participant group, participants were asked to describe their experiences of such technological advancements.

Most participants (18 out of 21) described how their respective police services currently utilize 360° photography or laser scanning methods to document their crime scenes, but due to limitation of the court, facilities were unable to present such evidence to the courts. In such situations, 3D laser scan data was used to create 2D plans which were then printed for the court. This was criticized by one participant, who expressed their opinion on having to print 2D plans as,

a travesty really when you consider what capability this data offers.

Often, such technology requires access to a data cloud, which raised an issue for two participants for evidence presentation.

One participant stated that it is,

unfortunate as the benefits of the data cloud as a contextual visual aid are unrivalled. In situations where the 3D data was allowed, it was only accepted into the court as a 3D animated “fly-through” played directly from a DVD. This participant stated that using this DVD method it was not possible to move through the scene in real time.

One participant did report being able to successfully present their 360° panoramas.

I was the first to show 360° panoramas along with point cloud data. I had to explain to the court what it was and how it was used prior to the case commencing. We have presented this type of evidence now in live court 3 times and received no criticism. There have been at least another 3 cases where we have produced it but not required to show it. It does require some advanced preparation and several visits to the court room to be used, to make sure it all works.

With the Ministry of Justice driving the adoption of technology and providing significant funding to ensure the uptake of technology by courtrooms, it is inevitable that courtrooms will become “digital by default”. This will provide a more efficient CJS and allow information transfer to become more seamless.

The results of the qualitative phenomenological research in this study identified six key themes from the responses of participants, representing 15 of the current 43 UK police services. The themes covered the “current use of technology in the courtroom”, “lack of technology in the courtroom”, “difficulties/barriers associated with the integration of technology into the courtroom”, “improvements/changes that are required for technology integration”, “the future of courtroom digital technology”, and “360° photography and laser scanning”. The participants reported a general lack of technological integration within any court environments. It was clear that a significant change is required to existing courtrooms and their infrastructure to allow the use of existing technology to be utilized effectively, particularly for crime scene documentation, such as 360° photography or laser scanning from crime scenes or of evidence types. These areas, along with virtual reality represented aspects which participants believed would describe future-proofed courtrooms. However, concerns were voiced by the study group questioned, over the contextual influence that immersive technology may potentially cause and questioned the need to expose jurors to such information. Clearly, not only does digital-technological development within the courtroom require consideration, the attendant psychological benefits and ethical aspects also require developing in parallel to make the use of digital technology a fully useful and integrated feature in the decision-making process of Jurys and the UK courts and to provide a digital end-to-end common platform. As part of the ethical concerns to be addressed and those of “evidence continuity and potential contamination” of data, the opportunity that may exist to manipulate visual images needs to be carefully explored and future-proofed into any systems being developed. The authors firmly believe and attest that there is considerable scope for exploring this area further, although realize that the restricted access for courtroom presentation are likely, which limits the academic study of this area.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

Computer generated

Criminal justice system

Crown Prosecution Service

Virtual reality

Agosto E, Ajmar A, Boccardo P, Tonolo FG, Lingua A (2008) Crime scene reconstruction using a fully geomatic approach. Sensors 8:6280–6302

Article   Google Scholar  

American Bar Association (2013) In: Poje J (ed) ABA Legal technology survey report. Volume VI. Mobile Lawyers

Google Scholar  

Bailenson JN, Blasovich J, Beall AC, Noveck B (2006) Courtroom applications of virtual environments, immersive virtual environments and collaborative virtual environments. Law Policy 28(2):249–270

Burton A, Schofield D, Goodwin L (2005) Gates of global perception: forensic graphics for evidence presentation. In: Proceedings of ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology, ACM Press, Singapore, pp 103–111

Chan A (2005) The use of low cost virtual reality and digital technology to aid forensic scene interpretation and recording. Cranfield University PhD Thesis, Cranfield

Dahir VB (2011) Chapter 3: digital visual evidence. 77-112. In: Henderson C, Epstein EJ (eds) The future of evidence: how science and technology will change the practice of law. American Bar association, Chicago

Dunn MA, Salovey P, Feigenson N (2006) The jury persuaded (and not): computer animation in the courtroom. Law Policy 28(2):228–248

Guest G, MacQueen K, Namey E (2012) Applied thematic analysis. Sage, Thousand

Book   Google Scholar  

Howard TLJ, Murta AD, Gibson S (2000) Virtual environments for scene of crime reconstruction and analysis. In: Proceedings of SPIE - International Society for Optical Engineering, p 3960

Kassin S, Dunn MA (1997) Computer-animated displays and the jury: facilitative and prejudicial effects. Law Hum Behav 21(3):269–281

Krieger R (1992) Sophisticated computer graphics come of age—and evidence will never be the same. J Am Bar Assoc:93–95

Kuehn PF (1999) Maximizing your persuasiveness: effective computer generated exhibits. DCBA Brief J DuPage County Bar Assoc, 12:1999-2000

Lederer FI (1994) Technology comes to the courtroom, and.... . Faculty Publications. Emory Law J 43:1095–1122

Lederer FI, Solomon SH (1997) Courtroom technology – an introduction to the onrushing future. In: Faculty Publications. 1653. Conference Proceedings. Part of the Fifth National Court Technology Conference in Detroit, Michigan

Leveson B (2015) Review of efficiency in criminal proceedings by the Rt Hon Sir Brian Leveson. President of the Queen’s Bench Division. Judiciary of England and Wales

Manker C (2015) Factors contributing to the limited use of information technology in state courtrooms. Thesis. Walden University Scholarworks, p 1416

Manlowe B (2005) Speaker, “use of technology in the courtroom,”. IADC Trial Academy, Stanford University, Palo Alto

Marder NS (2001) Juries and technology: equipping jurors for the twenty-first century. Brook Law Rev 66(4). Article 9):1257–1299

McCracken K (1999) To-scale crime scene models: a great visual aid for the jury. J Forensic Identification 49:130–133

McDougall R (2016) Designing the courtroom of the future. Paper delivered at the international conference on court excellence. 27-29 January. , Singapore

Ministry of Justice. (2013) Press release - Damien Green: ‘digital courtrooms’ to be rolled out nationally. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/damian-green-digital-courtroomsto - be-rolled-out-nationally

Ministry of Justice (2016). Transforming our justice system. By the Lord Chancellor, the Lord Chief Justice and the Senior President of Tribunals September 2016. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/553261/joint-vision-statement.pdf

Mullins RA (2016) Virtual views: exploring the utility and impact of terrestrial laser scanners in forensics and law. University of Windsor. Electronic Theses and Dissertation Paper. University of Windsor, 5855

Narayanan A, Hibbin S (2001) Can animations be safely used in court? Artif Intell Law 9(4):271–294

National Audit Office (2016) A report by the Comptroller and Auditor General: Efficiency in the Criminal Justice System. Ministry of Justice Available from: https://www.nao.org.uk/wpcontent/uploads/2016/03/Efficiency-in-the-criminal-justice-system.pdf

NSW Attorney General’s Department (2013) Report of the Trial Efficiency Working Group. Crim Law Rev Division Available from: http://www.justice.nsw.gov.au/justicepolicy/Documents/tewg_reportmarch2009.pdf

O’Brien JA, Marakas GM (2010) Management information systems, 10th edn. McGraw-Hill, Boston

Pointe LM (2002) The Michigan cyber court: a bold experiment in the development of the first public virtual courthouse. North Carolina J Law Technol 4(1). Article 5):51–92

Rawson B (2004) The case for the technology-laden courtroom. Courtroom 21 project. Technology White Paper

Reiling D (2010) Technology for justice: how information technology can support judicial reform. Leiden University Press, Reiling, Leiden

Saris WE, Gallhofer IN (2014) Design, evaluation, and analysis of questionnaires for survey research, Wiley series in Survey Methodology, 2nd edn. Wiley, New Jersey

Schofield D (2007) Using graphical technology to present evidence. In: Mason S (ed) Electronic Evidence: Disclosure, Discovery and Admissibility, vol 1, pp 101–121

Schofield D (2009) Animating evidence: computer game technology in the courtroom. J Inf Law Technol 1:1–21

Schofield D (2011) Playing with evidence: using video games in the courtroom. Entertainment Comput 2(1):47–58

Schofield D (2016) The use of computer generated imagery in legal proceedings. Digit Evid Electron Signature Law Rev 13:3–25

Schofield D, Fowle KG (2013) Technology corner visualising forensic data: evidence (part 1). J Digit Forensic Secur Law 8(1):73–90

Selbak J (1994) Digital Litigation: The Prejudicial Effects of Computer-Generated Animation in the Courtroom. High Technol Law J 9(2):337–367

Wiggins EC (2006) The courtroom of the future is here: introduction to emerging technologies in the legal system. Law Policy 28(2):182–191

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank the participants who took part in this study.

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Liverpool John Moores University, Pharmacy and Biomolecular Sciences, James Parsons Building, Byrom Street, Liverpool, L3 3AF, UK

K. Sheppard

Department of Forensic and Crime Sciences, Faculty of Computing, Engineering and Sciences, Science Centre, Staffordshire University, Leek Road, Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire, ST4 2DF, UK

S. J. Fieldhouse & J. P. Cassella

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

KS collected, analysed and interpreted the participant data regarding the use of technology in the criminal justice system with assistance from SF and JP. All authors were contributors in writing the manuscript and reading and approving the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to K. Sheppard .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

This study was considered using agreed university procedures and was approved by Staffordshire University.

Consent for publication

All data collected from the questionnaires was anonymised and it is not possible to identify the individuals who took part in the study through their statements or quotes. Participants were asked to sign a consent form stating that they understand that the data collected during the study would be anonymised prior to any publication.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Sheppard, K., Fieldhouse, S.J. & Cassella, J.P. Experiences of evidence presentation in court: an insight into the practice of crime scene examiners in England, Wales and Australia. Egypt J Forensic Sci 10 , 8 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41935-020-00184-5

Download citation

Received : 19 July 2019

Accepted : 17 February 2020

Published : 02 March 2020

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s41935-020-00184-5

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Courtroom evidence
• 360° photography
• Evidence presentation

An official website of the United States government

Here’s how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock Locked padlock icon ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

• Entire Site
• Research & Funding
• Health Information
• About NIDDK
• Diabetes Overview

Healthy Living with Diabetes

• Español

On this page:

How can I plan what to eat or drink when I have diabetes?

How can physical activity help manage my diabetes, what can i do to reach or maintain a healthy weight, should i quit smoking, how can i take care of my mental health, clinical trials for healthy living with diabetes.

Healthy living is a way to manage diabetes . To have a healthy lifestyle, take steps now to plan healthy meals and snacks, do physical activities, get enough sleep, and quit smoking or using tobacco products.

Healthy living may help keep your body’s blood pressure , cholesterol , and blood glucose level, also called blood sugar level, in the range your primary health care professional recommends. Your primary health care professional may be a doctor, a physician assistant, or a nurse practitioner. Healthy living may also help prevent or delay health problems  from diabetes that can affect your heart, kidneys, eyes, brain, and other parts of your body.

Making lifestyle changes can be hard, but starting with small changes and building from there may benefit your health. You may want to get help from family, loved ones, friends, and other trusted people in your community. You can also get information from your health care professionals.

What you choose to eat, how much you eat, and when you eat are parts of a meal plan. Having healthy foods and drinks can help keep your blood glucose, blood pressure, and cholesterol levels in the ranges your health care professional recommends. If you have overweight or obesity, a healthy meal plan—along with regular physical activity, getting enough sleep, and other healthy behaviors—may help you reach and maintain a healthy weight. In some cases, health care professionals may also recommend diabetes medicines that may help you lose weight, or weight-loss surgery, also called metabolic and bariatric surgery.

Choose healthy foods and drinks

There is no right or wrong way to choose healthy foods and drinks that may help manage your diabetes. Healthy meal plans for people who have diabetes may include

• dairy or plant-based dairy products
• nonstarchy vegetables
• protein foods
• whole grains

Try to choose foods that include nutrients such as vitamins, calcium , fiber , and healthy fats . Also try to choose drinks with little or no added sugar , such as tap or bottled water, low-fat or non-fat milk, and unsweetened tea, coffee, or sparkling water.

Try to plan meals and snacks that have fewer

• foods high in saturated fat
• foods high in sodium, a mineral found in salt
• sugary foods , such as cookies and cakes, and sweet drinks, such as soda, juice, flavored coffee, and sports drinks

Your body turns carbohydrates , or carbs, from food into glucose, which can raise your blood glucose level. Some fruits, beans, and starchy vegetables—such as potatoes and corn—have more carbs than other foods. Keep carbs in mind when planning your meals.

You should also limit how much alcohol you drink. If you take insulin  or certain diabetes medicines , drinking alcohol can make your blood glucose level drop too low, which is called hypoglycemia . If you do drink alcohol, be sure to eat food when you drink and remember to check your blood glucose level after drinking. Talk with your health care team about your alcohol-drinking habits.

Find the best times to eat or drink

Talk with your health care professional or health care team about when you should eat or drink. The best time to have meals and snacks may depend on

• what medicines you take for diabetes
• what your level of physical activity or your work schedule is
• whether you have other health conditions or diseases

Ask your health care team if you should eat before, during, or after physical activity. Some diabetes medicines, such as sulfonylureas  or insulin, may make your blood glucose level drop too low during exercise or if you skip or delay a meal.

Plan how much to eat or drink

You may worry that having diabetes means giving up foods and drinks you enjoy. The good news is you can still have your favorite foods and drinks, but you might need to have them in smaller portions  or enjoy them less often.

For people who have diabetes, carb counting and the plate method are two common ways to plan how much to eat or drink. Talk with your health care professional or health care team to find a method that works for you.

Carb counting

Carbohydrate counting , or carb counting, means planning and keeping track of the amount of carbs you eat and drink in each meal or snack. Not all people with diabetes need to count carbs. However, if you take insulin, counting carbs can help you know how much insulin to take.

Plate method

The plate method helps you control portion sizes  without counting and measuring. This method divides a 9-inch plate into the following three sections to help you choose the types and amounts of foods to eat for each meal.

• Nonstarchy vegetables—such as leafy greens, peppers, carrots, or green beans—should make up half of your plate.
• Carb foods that are high in fiber—such as brown rice, whole grains, beans, or fruits—should make up one-quarter of your plate.
• Protein foods—such as lean meats, fish, dairy, or tofu or other soy products—should make up one quarter of your plate.

If you are not taking insulin, you may not need to count carbs when using the plate method.

Work with your health care team to create a meal plan that works for you. You may want to have a diabetes educator  or a registered dietitian  on your team. A registered dietitian can provide medical nutrition therapy , which includes counseling to help you create and follow a meal plan. Your health care team may be able to recommend other resources, such as a healthy lifestyle coach, to help you with making changes. Ask your health care team or your insurance company if your benefits include medical nutrition therapy or other diabetes care resources.

Talk with your health care professional before taking dietary supplements

There is no clear proof that specific foods, herbs, spices, or dietary supplements —such as vitamins or minerals—can help manage diabetes. Your health care professional may ask you to take vitamins or minerals if you can’t get enough from foods. Talk with your health care professional before you take any supplements, because some may cause side effects or affect how well your diabetes medicines work.

Research shows that regular physical activity helps people manage their diabetes and stay healthy. Benefits of physical activity may include

• lower blood glucose, blood pressure, and cholesterol levels
• better heart health
• healthier weight
• better mood and sleep
• better balance and memory

Talk with your health care professional before starting a new physical activity or changing how much physical activity you do. They may suggest types of activities based on your ability, schedule, meal plan, interests, and diabetes medicines. Your health care professional may also tell you the best times of day to be active or what to do if your blood glucose level goes out of the range recommended for you.

Do different types of physical activity

People with diabetes can be active, even if they take insulin or use technology such as insulin pumps .

Try to do different kinds of activities . While being more active may have more health benefits, any physical activity is better than none. Start slowly with activities you enjoy. You may be able to change your level of effort and try other activities over time. Having a friend or family member join you may help you stick to your routine.

The physical activities you do may need to be different if you are age 65 or older , are pregnant , or have a disability or health condition . Physical activities may also need to be different for children and teens . Ask your health care professional or health care team about activities that are safe for you.

Aerobic activities

Aerobic activities make you breathe harder and make your heart beat faster. You can try walking, dancing, wheelchair rolling, or swimming. Most adults should try to get at least 150 minutes of moderate-intensity physical activity each week. Aim to do 30 minutes a day on most days of the week. You don’t have to do all 30 minutes at one time. You can break up physical activity into small amounts during your day and still get the benefit. 1

Strength training or resistance training

Strength training or resistance training may make your muscles and bones stronger. You can try lifting weights or doing other exercises such as wall pushups or arm raises. Try to do this kind of training two times a week. 1

Balance and stretching activities

Balance and stretching activities may help you move better and have stronger muscles and bones. You may want to try standing on one leg or stretching your legs when sitting on the floor. Try to do these kinds of activities two or three times a week. 1

Some activities that need balance may be unsafe for people with nerve damage or vision problems caused by diabetes. Ask your health care professional or health care team about activities that are safe for you.

Stay safe during physical activity

Staying safe during physical activity is important. Here are some tips to keep in mind.

Drink liquids

Drinking liquids helps prevent dehydration , or the loss of too much water in your body. Drinking water is a way to stay hydrated. Sports drinks often have a lot of sugar and calories , and you don’t need them for most moderate physical activities.

Avoid low blood glucose

Check your blood glucose level before, during, and right after physical activity. Physical activity often lowers the level of glucose in your blood. Low blood glucose levels may last for hours or days after physical activity. You are most likely to have low blood glucose if you take insulin or some other diabetes medicines, such as sulfonylureas.

Ask your health care professional if you should take less insulin or eat carbs before, during, or after physical activity. Low blood glucose can be a serious medical emergency that must be treated right away. Take steps to protect yourself. You can learn how to treat low blood glucose , let other people know what to do if you need help, and use a medical alert bracelet.

Avoid high blood glucose and ketoacidosis

Taking less insulin before physical activity may help prevent low blood glucose, but it may also make you more likely to have high blood glucose. If your body does not have enough insulin, it can’t use glucose as a source of energy and will use fat instead. When your body uses fat for energy, your body makes chemicals called ketones .

High levels of ketones in your blood can lead to a condition called diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) . DKA is a medical emergency that should be treated right away. DKA is most common in people with type 1 diabetes . Occasionally, DKA may affect people with type 2 diabetes  who have lost their ability to produce insulin. Ask your health care professional how much insulin you should take before physical activity, whether you need to test your urine for ketones, and what level of ketones is dangerous for you.

Take care of your feet

People with diabetes may have problems with their feet because high blood glucose levels can damage blood vessels and nerves. To help prevent foot problems, wear comfortable and supportive shoes and take care of your feet  before, during, and after physical activity.

If you have diabetes, managing your weight  may bring you several health benefits. Ask your health care professional or health care team if you are at a healthy weight  or if you should try to lose weight.

If you are an adult with overweight or obesity, work with your health care team to create a weight-loss plan. Losing 5% to 7% of your current weight may help you prevent or improve some health problems  and manage your blood glucose, cholesterol, and blood pressure levels. 2 If you are worried about your child’s weight  and they have diabetes, talk with their health care professional before your child starts a new weight-loss plan.

You may be able to reach and maintain a healthy weight by

• following a healthy meal plan
• consuming fewer calories
• being physically active
• getting 7 to 8 hours of sleep each night 3

If you have type 2 diabetes, your health care professional may recommend diabetes medicines that may help you lose weight.

Online tools such as the Body Weight Planner  may help you create eating and physical activity plans. You may want to talk with your health care professional about other options for managing your weight, including joining a weight-loss program  that can provide helpful information, support, and behavioral or lifestyle counseling. These options may have a cost, so make sure to check the details of the programs.

Your health care professional may recommend weight-loss surgery  if you aren’t able to reach a healthy weight with meal planning, physical activity, and taking diabetes medicines that help with weight loss.

If you are pregnant , trying to lose weight may not be healthy. However, you should ask your health care professional whether it makes sense to monitor or limit your weight gain during pregnancy.

Both diabetes and smoking —including using tobacco products and e-cigarettes—cause your blood vessels to narrow. Both diabetes and smoking increase your risk of having a heart attack or stroke , nerve damage , kidney disease , eye disease , or amputation . Secondhand smoke can also affect the health of your family or others who live with you.

If you smoke or use other tobacco products, stop. Ask for help . You don’t have to do it alone.

Feeling stressed, sad, or angry can be common for people with diabetes. Managing diabetes or learning to cope with new information about your health can be hard. People with chronic illnesses such as diabetes may develop anxiety or other mental health conditions .

Learn healthy ways to lower your stress , and ask for help from your health care team or a mental health professional. While it may be uncomfortable to talk about your feelings, finding a health care professional whom you trust and want to talk with may help you

• lower your feelings of stress, depression, or anxiety
• manage problems sleeping or remembering things
• see how diabetes affects your family, school, work, or financial situation

Ask your health care team for mental health resources for people with diabetes.

Sleeping too much or too little may raise your blood glucose levels. Your sleep habits may also affect your mental health and vice versa. People with diabetes and overweight or obesity can also have other health conditions that affect sleep, such as sleep apnea , which can raise your blood pressure and risk of heart disease.

NIDDK conducts and supports clinical trials in many diseases and conditions, including diabetes. The trials look to find new ways to prevent, detect, or treat disease and improve quality of life.

What are clinical trials for healthy living with diabetes?

Clinical trials—and other types of clinical studies —are part of medical research and involve people like you. When you volunteer to take part in a clinical study, you help health care professionals and researchers learn more about disease and improve health care for people in the future.

Researchers are studying many aspects of healthy living for people with diabetes, such as

• how changing when you eat may affect body weight and metabolism
• how less access to healthy foods may affect diabetes management, other health problems, and risk of dying
• whether low-carbohydrate meal plans can help lower blood glucose levels
• which diabetes medicines are more likely to help people lose weight

Find out if clinical trials are right for you .

Watch a video of NIDDK Director Dr. Griffin P. Rodgers explaining the importance of participating in clinical trials.

What clinical trials for healthy living with diabetes are looking for participants?

You can view a filtered list of clinical studies on healthy living with diabetes that are federally funded, open, and recruiting at www.ClinicalTrials.gov . You can expand or narrow the list to include clinical studies from industry, universities, and individuals; however, the National Institutes of Health does not review these studies and cannot ensure they are safe for you. Always talk with your primary health care professional before you participate in a clinical study.

This content is provided as a service of the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK), part of the National Institutes of Health. NIDDK translates and disseminates research findings to increase knowledge and understanding about health and disease among patients, health professionals, and the public. Content produced by NIDDK is carefully reviewed by NIDDK scientists and other experts.

NIDDK would like to thank: Elizabeth M. Venditti, Ph.D., University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine.