Everyday Evidence - How FRE 404(b) works

Professor Charles Rose from Stetson University College of Law discusses non character theories of relevancy for character evidence.

Пікірлер: 20

  • @samtala7973
    @samtala79732 жыл бұрын

    I love your videos and how you explain topics! So clear and concise. Thank you!

  • @luciavargas8659
    @luciavargas86593 жыл бұрын

    I appreciate how clear and concise you explain this confusing topic! Thank you!

  • @Izz157
    @Izz1576 жыл бұрын

    Your videos have been extremely helpful! Thank you!

  • @robertboyer2853
    @robertboyer285310 жыл бұрын

    thank you for your videos.

  • @noorel-gohary3550
    @noorel-gohary35506 жыл бұрын

    How eloquent. Thank you.

  • @NateEsq
    @NateEsq5 жыл бұрын

    Crystal clear. Thank you.

  • @mogeagahian6123
    @mogeagahian61238 жыл бұрын

    Excellent. Thank you.

  • @rockstarphill
    @rockstarphill11 жыл бұрын

    Great Job!!! Very Helpful

  • @stacykaiser4688
    @stacykaiser4688 Жыл бұрын

    The respondent in deposition stated he was not at a location. I have GPS evidence (freely given) off his phone verifying he was there (or at least his phone was). Any thoughts on how you would cross examine. Any chance I could email a few more details.

  • @CharlesRoseIII

    @CharlesRoseIII

    Жыл бұрын

    Stacy, shoot me an email with more particulars. Best to use thetrialadvocate@gmail.com. I’m giving a speech in a bit, but will look at it later today and get back to you. Please include your jurisdiction when you send the info. Thanks!

  • @biebskenni6602
    @biebskenni66026 жыл бұрын

    You are going to love this. So at my most recent murder trial I brought up the defendant’s homosexuality to prove motive in a way that the defendant’s attorney never expected. Obviously his attorney objected immediately on relevance grounds but at our sidebar conversation I explained that I wanted to show the defendant wanted to be imprisoned where he would be surrounded by only men. That was his motive to kill. When the Judge overruled the objection the defendant outraged, immediately got up to confess that he had done it but that he was not homosexual. Obviously his attorney moved to strike the confession but the judge explained that there was no lack of trustworthiness nor coercion. The jury didn’t deliberate very long before finding him guilty of aggravated murder. I know this is not really 404b related and this was also in a state, not federal proceeding but it had a surprising outcome.

  • @jgc1077

    @jgc1077

    Жыл бұрын

    Hahaha!

  • @danringo940
    @danringo94011 жыл бұрын

    Great lecture on 404b

  • @TheJansport1
    @TheJansport111 жыл бұрын

    Great video!! I only wished that they would have made this video under the revised language of the Federal Rules of Evidence (post December 1, 2011).

  • @stacykaiser4688
    @stacykaiser4688 Жыл бұрын

    Do you ever answer specific questions?

  • @CharlesRoseIII

    @CharlesRoseIII

    Жыл бұрын

    Sure, if it is something I’ve got knowledge of.

  • @levil.wilkes2650
    @levil.wilkes265010 жыл бұрын

    makes more sense now. thanks