Best evidence rule

A rule of evidence law requiring that to prove the content of a writing, recording, or photograph, the original writing, recording, or photograph is required. See Fed. R. Ev. 1002. "Where the terms are material, the original writing must be produced unless it is shown to be unavailable for some reason other than the serious fault of the proponent." McCormick, Evidence §230, 232 (4th ed. 1992).

About the best evidence rule

The best evidence rule is a common law rule of evidence which can be traced back at least as far as the 18th century. In Omychund v Barker (1745) 1 Atk, 21, 49; 26 ER 15, 33, Lord Harwicke stated that no evidence was admissible unless it was "the best that the nature of the case will allow". The general rule is that secondary evidence, such as a copy or facsimile, will be not admissible if an original document is available.

The rationale for the best evidence rule can be understood from the context in which it arose: in the eighteenth century a copy was usually made by hand by a clerk (or even a litigant). The best evidence rule was predicated on the assumption that, if the original was not produced, there was a significant chance of error or fraud in relying on such a copy.

In the age of digital facsimiles, etc. the rule is more difficult to justify. The likelihood of actual error (as opposed to mere illegibility) through copying is slight. The balance of convenience favours avoiding needless effort and delay where there is no dispute about the fairness and adequacy of a digital facsimile. Further, it is by no means clear what the 'original' of an electronic communication such as an e-mail actually is: as many as eight electronic 'copies' of a message might come into existence from creation to receipt.

The best evidence rule is also thought to be the basis for the rule precluding the admissibility of hearsay evidence, although the two rules are now quite distinct.


United States

In the United States the rule has been codified in the Federal Rules of Evidence as rule 1002:

To prove the content of a writing, recording, or photograph, the original writing, recording, or photograph is required, except as otherwise provided in these rules or by Act of Congress.

The rule requires that when writings are introduced as evidence in a trial, the original writing must be produced as the "best evidence". In Federal practice, however, any exact copies of the original carry the same legal weight as the original unless their authenticity is in question.

The term "writing" has been liberally interpreted to include photographs, x-rays, and films. Note that for photographs and film, this could be construed to mean negatives, not prints, as they are the true 'original'.

The rule applies in two situations:

• Where the terms of the writing are legally dispositive in the issue at bar (not collateral documents or issues).
• Where the witness's sole knowledge of a fact comes from having read it in the document.

There is an exception. If the original document is unavailable for reasons other than serious misconduct of the proponent, secondary sources of evidence (such as oral testimony) can be used in place of the original.

Currently, both California law and the Federal rules allow the use of mechanically produced duplicates unless a party has raised a genuine question about the accuracy of the copy or can show that its use would be unfair.


Related links

Best evidence rule - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Summary of the Rules of Evidence

best evidence rule - legal definition

http://www.clrc.ca.gov/pub/Printed-R...idenceRule.pdf

Virtual Law Journal

http://www.justice.org.uk/images/pdf...ayevidence.pdf

The Best Evidence Rule: What Is It? - Associated Content



How to Update Wiki

The Law Wiki is still very new and so it's a great time to jump in and start updating it and learning how to use it. You really can't mess anything up, because all revisions are stored and can be rolled back by a moderator, so play away and you can help make this a great resource for WORLDLawDirect visitors.