Examples Of Demonstrative Evidence

This is evidence that can be classified into two broad categories which is demonstrative evidence and substantive evidence, The demonstrative evidence in a trial is the evidence other than a testimony that is presented during the course of a civil or criminal trial the demonstrative evidence includes actual evidence examples include (set of bloody gloves from a murder scene and illustrative evidence photos and charts. In trial cases many attorneys view the presentation of the evidence as demonstrative. A common example of demonstrative evidence is a still photograph, photographs of plaintiffs bruises taken immediately after an accident, these pictures will be able to help jury understand and see what took place at trial even if the trial is months from that date the injuries actually happened on. In this case a photograph, which is to be considered as demonstrative evidence could possibly solve a case and answer lots of questions a jury might have also questions and concerns the jury might have of the victim. Also another example would be aerial photographs of the crime scene of a vehicular accident can show how a particular intersection is laid out and can make more clear an ambiguous description of a bind intersection given by a witness.

Another prime example of demonstrative evidence are X-Rays and medical models and illustrations can be very helpful to a jury in a physical injury case, this example of demonstrative evidence can help any jury see inside the victim to understand the nature and extent of the injuries.

(Legal dictionary 2015) The most effective and most useful form of demonstrative evidence is graphs and charts. The tools can illustrate a loss of earrings a decrease in life expectancy and past future. Charts help jury understand evidence much better and show events in chronological order and fashion, this is so the evidence will be

organized.
Fruit of the Poisonous Tree
The fruit of the poisonous tree is a legal metaphor in the United States used to describe evidence that is obtained illegally The logic of the terminology is that if the source of the (tree doctrine) of the evidence itself is tainted then anything gained from it is tainted evidence as well. (Legaldictionary.com, 2015). The fruit of the poisonous tree is an extension to the exclusionary rule established in Silverthorne Lumber Co V. United States, 251 U.S. 385 (1920). The doctrine holds that evidence gathered with the assistance of illegally obtained information must be excluded from trial. The fruit of poisonous tree doctrine is subject to three exceptions; the evidence will not be excluded if it was discovered from a source independent of the illegal activity. In this case if the evidence discovery was inevitable or if there is attenuation between the illegal activity and the discovery of the evidenced this is due to the poisonous tree. (Fruit of poisonous tree, 2015). The Fruit of poisonous tree rule in statuary and or in court as its rule evokes more passion than rational if the fruits of an inadmissible confession are excluded “the impact on law enforcement will be in tact. Any evidence found by cops illegally during a search without a warrant is inadmissible in court due to the fruit of poisonous tree and violation within a persons fourth amendment rights. Also any statement or confessions to police during time of crime can be a violation of your rights the officer could be possibly make you make a statement or intimidate you by coercing out of you This comes from police illegality which is the seized object of statement something that an officer discovered as a result of the object or statement example of the latter of the fruit of poisonous tree doctrine. (nolo.com). (Fruit Of Poisonous Tree, 2015).
Case
In the case of Brewer v. Williams (United States Supreme Court 430 U.S. 387(1977) Williams was charged with abducing a ten year old girl in Davenport Iowa, while transporting Williams, officers were told not to question Williams on the transport, despite what was told of officers, questioning was done anyways, Williams did not want to speak with officers without attorney present, officers knew Williams was a religious former mental patient. Officers made up religious story to Williams in relation to were the girls body was hidden. After that was reported Williams made incriminating statements against himself stating were the girls body was hidden he was then tried for murder and convicted, Williams argued that incriminating statements were made in violation of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel.
The conclusion of this case was that police violated defendant’s rights to counsel, which is a violation of the sixth amendment (sixth Amendment, 2015) and has never been advised to remain silent (Miranda v. United States) (Miranda Rights, 2015). Absent a clear showing that he explicitly, voluntary and knowingly relinquished that right. (Brewer v. Williams, 1977). This case was a violation of the fruit of poisonous tree and also the exclusionary rule, and the violation of Williams’s rights to counsel, which is stated in the United States Amendments, and rights in this case the sixth amendment was violated, so the evidence or incriminating speech would most likely be admissible in the court of law.