What Is Good Evidence?

If you’re going to court to give evidence, you are going to want your evidence to be valued highly by the judge and preferred to the evidence given by others.

But how do you ensure your evidence is deemed to be of a good quality, and what are the characteristics of good evidence?

From my experience of giving evidence over many years, I would argue that one of the most important factors is that the evidence you give is specific.

By this I mean that if, for example, you are giving evidence about an incident of domestic abuse which you experienced, that it is vital that you know information such as the time of day it occurred, the day and date, the place, who was present, were there any witnesses who could corroborate your allegation, what was the perpetrator wearing, whether you sustained any injuries, and if so, whether you were seen by a medical professional, at or near the date of the incident.

 The circumstance or situation which gave rise to the incident, the context and environment in which it occurred, including such factors as the lighting and the weather at the time, are all matters you would need to have a recollection of.

Indeed, with respect to your memory the judge will likely ask you whether your account of what occurred was documented contemporaneously. He or she will ask this question because they want to know when it was documented, since the more time that has elapsed between the incident and when you documented it, the more the memory tends to fade and become less clear.

The more specific and detailed your description of the incident, the more believable it is likely to be.

You have to be able to provide detailed evidence, in other words a detailed account of the incident.

How useful would any allegation you make be if when narrating your account of the event you are unable to recall key aspects of what you say transpired?

When you are able to talk about it in detail, it is much more believable, than when vital detail is lacking.

Anyone can make up allegations, but when those allegations are backed up by significant detail and when that detail can be checked out, confirmed, or verified, then that allegation progresses to be viewed as far more credible.

As well as being specific and detailed, good evidence has to be clear and unambiguous. In other words what is being said or alleged is not open to other interpretations that are equally plausible.

The strongest evidence is said to be incontrovertible, this refers to evidence which as far as possible leaves no degree of doubt and is considered to be so conclusive that there can be no other truth or conclusion arrived at. An example of this could be DNA testing which proves a child’s paternity. However finding incontrovertible evidence is rare.

Good evidence, though is nothing if not consistent with all of the rest of the evidence you provide and who you demonstrate yourself to be whilst giving verbal evidence. You, like your evidence has to be consistent throughout.

For example, your evidence is very likely to be viewed as inconsistent if you claim to be frightened of your ex partner, but there is much evidence of you going out of your way to engage in frequent arguments, fights and verbal abuse with the person your claim to be terrified of.

Bear in mind at all times that it is not just those cross-examining you who are scrutinising everything you do or say. The judge is constantly ‘sizing you up’ and making an assessment of your character. He or she wants to know whether or not you are a character whose words and actions can be relied upon. They want and need to know how consistent your character is.

Judges are astute at assessing witnesses’ characters, they know that it is rare for people to deviate from their basic character and that their basic personality traits show themselves, if observed for long enough and when under substantial stress and pressure.

Good evidence illustrates or demonstrates patterns of behaviour which can be observed from past behaviour and are indicative of future behaviour. So whenever you can identify patterns of behaviour, this can be used as evidence of likely current and future behaviour, unless strenuous efforts over a period of time have been made to change predictable behaviour, and this is unusual.

We are all tend to be creatures of habit. We do things repeatedly, over and over again, this is how we learn and we behave consistent with our self image and the way we see ourselves.

So, with regard to an alleged perpetrators behaviour, for your evidence to be believable and convincing, it has to be consistent with the way that person has behaved in the past, on more than one or numerous occasions.

The best evidence though is often referred to as cogent evidence which is both convincing and compelling. Convincing evidence is evidence that is very believable, and compelling evidence is evidence that is forceful or compels others to accept it due to the quality or forcefulness of the arguments and its presentation.

In order to produce cogent evidence, I would assert that your evidence needs to be specific, detailed, clear, verifiable, consistent, produced contemporaneously, and in addition to the factors mentioned above it needs to be delivered in a confident, congruent manner.

Giving good evidence is not just a matter of saying the ‘right’ things at the right time, it is about expressing yourself and your argument with passion and conviction. You do this when your words and arguments, facial expression and body language are all in total alignment.