1
Defense Attorney: "Your Honor, the defendant’s history of giving to charity shows that he is a compassionate person and couldn’t have committed this crime."
Objection: Rule 404(a)(1) - Character Evidence Character evidence is not admissible to prove that the defendant acted in accordance with that trait on a particular occasion. In this case, charitable behavior is irrelevant to whether the defendant committed the crime in question.
Prosecutor: "The defendant was seen attending anger management classes three years ago, which suggests that he has a violent temperament."
Objection: Rule 404(b)(1) - Crimes, Wrongs, or Other Acts This is improper character evidence because it suggests the defendant acted in conformity with a prior act (attending anger management classes) to prove they are violent, which is prohibited unless used to show motive, intent, or another allowed purpose.
Witness: "The defendant’s neighbor often plays loud music at night, which might explain why the defendant was agitated on the night of the incident."
Objection: Rule 401 - Relevance The fact that the neighbor plays loud music does not make it more or less probable that the defendant committed the crime. This statement is irrelevant to determining the defendant’s guilt or innocence in this case.
Prosecutor: "We have evidence that after the accident, the defendant’s company installed better safety features in their vehicles, proving they were at fault for the crash."
Objection: Rule 407 - Subsequent Remedial Measures Evidence of subsequent remedial measures is not admissible to prove negligence or culpable conduct. The fact that the company improved safety measures after the accident cannot be used to show fault.
Statement 5:
Prosecutor: "The defendant has liability insurance, so they have nothing to lose in this civil suit."
Objection: Rule 411 - Liability Insurance Evidence that a person has liability insurance is not admissible to prove negligence or wrongful action. This statement could mislead the jury into thinking the defendant’s insurance status is relevant to their liability in the case.
Defense Attorney: "The defendant has always been a devoted father and takes his children to school every day."
Objection: Rule 404(a)(1) - Character Evidence This statement is inadmissible because it is an attempt to prove that the defendant acted in accordance with a character trait (being a devoted father) on the occasion in question, which is irrelevant to the crime.
Prosecutor: "The defendant was fired from his previous job for being dishonest, which proves he is not credible."
Objection: Rule 403 - Exclusion for Prejudice The statement could be excluded because its prejudicial effect (painting the defendant as dishonest) outweighs its probative value. It might unfairly sway the jury against the defendant based on prior unrelated conduct.
Witness: "I heard from someone in the neighborhood that the defendant was seen arguing with his spouse the day before the incident."
Objection: Rule 602 - Lack of Personal Knowledge The witness is testifying about something they did not personally observe. Under Rule 602, a witness may only testify to matters they have personal knowledge of.
Defense Attorney: "The victim was known to start fights at local bars, so it’s likely he provoked the defendant."
Objection: Rule 404(a)(2)(B)(i) - Character Evidence This is an attempt to introduce the victim's character trait (aggressiveness) to suggest they acted in accordance with that trait on the occasion. Unless the defense can prove relevance, this would be inadmissible character evidence.
Prosecutor: "The defendant’s previous DUI conviction shows that he has a pattern of reckless behavior."
Objection: Rule 404(b)(1) - Crimes, Wrongs, or Other Acts Prior bad acts cannot be used to prove the defendant’s character in order to show action in conformity with that behavior. This is inadmissible unless used for another specific purpose, like showing intent or lack of mistake.
Defense Attorney: "The defendant has always been punctual and respectful at work, so he couldn’t have committed the robbery."
Objection: Rule 404(a)(1) - Character Evidence The defense is attempting to prove that the defendant’s workplace behavior indicates innocence, which is inadmissible as character evidence for showing action in conformity with that trait.
Witness: "The defendant’s mother was a known criminal, so it runs in the family."
Objection: Rule 404(a)(1) - Character Evidence This is improper character evidence, as it attempts to use the mother’s criminal history to suggest that the defendant acted in accordance with the family trait of criminality, which is inadmissible.
Defense Attorney: "The defendant’s employer offered to pay the plaintiff’s medical bills after the accident."
Objection: Rule 409 - Offers to Pay Medical Expenses Offers to pay medical expenses are not admissible to prove liability for the injury. This statement cannot be used to suggest the employer was admitting fault.
Prosecutor: "The defendant has never once apologized for his actions, showing his lack of remorse."
Objection: Rule 403 - Exclusion for Prejudice While potentially relevant, the prejudicial effect of suggesting the defendant’s guilt based on lack of apology outweighs its probative value, as it could unfairly influence the jury.
Defense Attorney: "The defendant’s friend claims he always follows the law and wouldn’t commit a crime."
Objection: Rule 405(a) - Methods of Proving Character Character evidence through reputation or opinion can only be introduced when the defendant’s character trait is pertinent to the case. Here, it is an improper use of opinion testimony about the defendant’s law-abiding character.
Witness: "The defendant’s car insurance covers accidents, so the plaintiff’s injuries should be covered."
Objection: Rule 411 - Liability Insurance Evidence of liability insurance is not admissible to prove negligence or liability. This statement is irrelevant to the issue of fault and could mislead the jury.
Prosecutor: "The defendant was arrested for disorderly conduct last year, which shows a pattern of unlawful behavior."
Objection: Rule 404(b)(1) - Crimes, Wrongs, or Other Acts This prior bad act cannot be introduced to show the defendant’s criminal character or that they acted in conformity with it on this occasion. It is inadmissible unless relevant for another purpose like motive or intent.
Defense Attorney: "The defendant was calm and cooperative during police questioning, which proves he didn’t commit the crime."
Objection: No Objection. This statement could be admissible as evidence of the defendant’s demeanor during police questioning, which may have some relevance to his behavior during the alleged crime.
Witness: "I remember the defendant fixing his fence two weeks after his dog bit someone. That shows he knew the fence was faulty."
Objection: Rule 407 - Subsequent Remedial Measures This statement is inadmissible because subsequent remedial measures (like fixing the fence) cannot be used to prove liability or negligence. It can only be used for purposes like proving ownership or control if relevant.
Prosecutor: "The victim’s peaceful nature means it’s unlikely he provoked the defendant into attacking him."
Objection: Rule 404(a)(2)(C) - Character Evidence While the victim’s character for peacefulness may be admissible in a homicide case to rebut claims of aggression, the prosecution must first prove that the victim’s trait is pertinent to the case before it is admitted.
Defense Attorney: "The defendant was seen talking to his insurance agent just before the incident, which suggests he was planning something."
Objection: Rule 411 - Liability Insurance The mention of an insurance agent is irrelevant to proving any fact in dispute and could mislead the jury by implying wrongdoing based on an irrelevant conversation with an insurance agent.
Prosecutor: "The defendant’s failure to participate in plea discussions shows he knew he was guilty."
Objection: Rule 411 - Liability Insurance The mention of an insurance agent is irrelevant to proving any fact in dispute and could mislead the jury by implying wrongdoing based on an irrelevant conversation with an insurance agent.
Defense Attorney: "The defendant’s neighbor heard that the plaintiff was suing him just for money."
Objection: Rule 802 - Hearsay This is hearsay, as it is an out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted (that the plaintiff is suing just for financial gain). It is inadmissible unless a hearsay exception applies.
Witness: "The defendant often walks his dog in the morning, so he couldn’t have been at the scene of the crime."
Objection: No Objection. This statement could be admissible, as it is evidence of habit under Rule 406. A person’s habit can be used to prove that they acted in accordance with that habit on a particular occasion.
Prosecutor: "The defendant had insurance on the vehicle, so he was likely more reckless."
Objection: Rule 411 - Liability Insurance Evidence of insurance cannot be used to suggest negligence or reckless behavior. The existence of insurance is irrelevant to whether the defendant was negligent or reckless.