Proposed Court Rules of Evidence at Trials or Hearings
Under the authority vested in the Court of The North Pacific under the Constitution of The North Pacific, the following guidelines are established. In the event any provision of these Rules conflict, or appear to conflict, with the Constitution of The North Pacific, the Bill of Rights, or the North Pacific Legal Code, then that provision will prevail over these Rules.
Rule 1. Rules of Evidence
A - These Rules govern matters of evidence in proceedings in the Court of The North Pacific.
B - These Rules will be construed to secure fairness in administration, elimination of unjustifiable delay, and promotion of growth and development of the law of evidence to the end that the truth may be ascertained and proceedings justly determined.
Rule 2. Preliminary Determinations Prior to Trial or Hearing.
A - Preliminary questions concerning the qualification of a person to be a witness, the existence of a privilege, or the admissibility of evidence will be determined by the Court.
B - In making a determination, it is not bound by the rules of evidence except those with respect to privileges.
C - When the relevancy of evidence depends upon the fulfillment of a condition of fact, the Court will admit it upon, or subject to, the introduction of evidence sufficient to support a finding of the fulfillment of the condition.
D - A defendant in a criminal proceeding does not, by testifying upon a preliminary matter, become subject to cross-examination as to other issues in the case. This rule does not limit the right of a party to introduce evidence before the Court that is relevant to weight or credibility.
Rule 3. Pretrial discovery of evidence and compilation of testimony.
A - Once a plea is entered in a criminal or impeachment proceeding, or a response to a complaint is filed in a civil proceeding, a period of time for the discovery of evidence and the compilation of witness testimony will commence.
B - This period will be no less than 24 hours, unless extended upon a request made for good cause shown, by the presiding judge.
C - In no case will the period of discovery and compilation exceed 14 days.
D - No witness will be interviewed by the prosecution or the defendant, or a representative of either side, for purposes of recording for use as trial testimony unless all parties have the opportunity to be present and to participate in the interview.
E - A record of the unedited interview will be made and filed with the presiding judge by private message, along with the objections raised by any of the parties and any comments that concern the objections.
F - Any objections to a question or an answer will be preserved as part of the record; the presiding judge will edit out the objections and any portions of the testimony that are found to be inappropriate for evidentiary purposes prior to use at trial.
Rule 4. Judicial Notice.
A - The Court may take judicial notice, whether requested or not, of a judicially noticed fact where it is one not subject to reasonable dispute in that it is either generally known within the jurisdiction of the Court or capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.
Rule 5. Relevant Evidence Generally Admissible; Irrelevant Evidence Inadmissible.
A - All relevant evidence is admissible, except as otherwise provided by the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, or the Legal Code. Evidence which is not relevant is not admissible.
B - ‘‘Relevant evidence’’ means evidence that is material to the issues of the case, that is, the evidence has any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the ultimate action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.
Rule 6. Exclusion of Relevant Evidence on Grounds of Privilege, Prejudice, or Waste of Time.
A - Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.
B - At this time, the only privilege deemed applicable to testimony is an official privilege of government members concerning the conduct of their official duties as to matters deemed secret or confidential unless the appropriate authority in the government has determined that disclosure at trial would not cause an adverse effect on current government matters as to the defense or external relations of the region.
C - The presiding Justice, Justices, or Hearing Officer has an unfettered right of access to review all of the information to which a privilege is asserted bu a party or witness before a trial or hearing so that the Court can rule on claims of admissibility and privilege.
Rule 7. Character Evidence Not Admissible To Prove Conduct; Exceptions; Other Crimes.
A - Evidence of a person’s character or a trait of character is not admissible for the purpose of proving a specific act in conformity therewith on a particular occasion.
B - Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity therewith, but may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident.
C - In all cases in which evidence of character or a trait of character of a person is admissible, proof may be made by testimony as to reputation or by testimony in the form of an opinion. On cross-examination, inquiry is allowable into relevant specific instances of conduct. In cases in which character or a trait of character of a person is an essential element of a charge, claim, or defense, proof may also be made of specific instances of that person’s conduct. Evidence of the habit of a person or of the routine practice of an organization, whether corroborated or not, and regardless of the presence of eyewitnesses, is relevant to prove that the conduct of the person or organization on a particular occasion was in conformity with the habit or routine practice.
Rule 8. Competency.
A - Every person is competent to be a witness, except as otherwise provided in these Rules.
B - A witness may not testify to a matter unless evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that the witness has personal knowledge of the matter.
C - Evidence to prove personal knowledge may, but need not, consist of the witness’ own testimony.
D - This rule is subject to the requirements for opinion testimony by expert witnesses.
Rule 9. Judge or Counsel as Witness.
A - The judge presiding at the trial may not testify in that trial as a witness.
B - Counsel for a party, including the Attorney General may not testify as a witness before the Court in the trial of the case in which counsel is sitting.
C- No objection need be made in order to preserve either point on review.
Rule 10. Impeachment of Witness Credibility.
A - The credibility of a witness may be attacked by any party, including the party calling the witness.
Rule 11. Mode and Order of Interrogation and Presentation.
A - The Court will exercise reasonable control over the mode and order of interrogating witnesses by the recordation of testimony prior to trial for presentation to the Court as evidence so as to make the interrogation and presentation effective for the ascertainment of the truth, avoid needless consumption of time, and protect witnesses from harassment or undue embarrassment.
B - All testimony will be recorded by the parties prior to trial for presentation to the Court.
C - Pretrial recordation will permit the court to review any evidentiary objections and edit the transcript of testimony in accordance with the Court’s rulings prior to trial.
Rule 12. Examination of Witnesses.
A - Every witness shall be first examined by the party or its representative that called the witness and the witness is subject to cross-examination by all other parties or their representatives.
B - Cross-examination should be limited to the subject matter of the direct examination and matters affecting the credibility of the witness.
C - The court may, in the exercise of discretion, permit inquiry into additional matters as if on direct examination.
D - Leading questions (that is, questions in which the answer is suggested by the wording of a question to a witness) should not be used on the direct examination of a witness except as may be necessary to develop the witness’ testimony.
E - Ordinarily leading questions should be permitted on cross-examination.
F - When a party calls a hostile witness, an adverse party, or a witness identified with an adverse party, interrogation may be by leading questions.
Rule 13. Use of Prior Statements of Witnesses.
A - In examining a witness in a recorded interview for use at a trial or hearing, concerning a prior statement made by the witness, the statement need not be shown nor its contents disclosed to the witness at that time; but on request the same will be shown or disclosed to opposing counsel at that time.
B - Extrinsic evidence of a prior inconsistent statement by a witness is not admissible unless the witness is afforded an opportunity to explain or deny the same and the opposite party is afforded an opportunity to interrogate the witness thereon, or the interests of justice otherwise require.
C - This provision does not apply to admissions of a party-opponent in a filing with the court.
Rule 14. Calling and Interrogation of Witnesses by Court.
A - The court may, on its own motion or at the suggestion of a party, call witnesses, and all parties are entitled to cross-examine witnesses thus called.
B - The court may interrogate witnesses, whether called by itself or by a party.
C - The court may call or interrogate witnesses in a separate pre-trial session from other recorded interviews of a witness, provided all parties are invited to participate in the interview.
D - Objections to the calling of witnesses by the court or to interrogation by it may be made prior or during the recordation of testimony prior to the trial or hearing.
Rule 15. Opinion Testimony by Lay Witnesses.
A - If the witness is not testifying as an expert, the witness’ testimony in the form of opinions or inferences is limited to those opinions or inferences which are rationally based on the perception of the witness, helpful to a clear understanding of the witness’ testimony or the determination of a fact in issue, and not based on scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge.
Rule 16. Opinion Testimony by Experts.
A - If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise, if (1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods, and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case.
Rule 17. Hearsay.
A- “Hearsay” is a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted as opposed to proving the fact that the statement was made.
B - A statement that has circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness is not excluded by the hearsay rule, if the court determines that the statement is offered as evidence of a material fact; the statement is more probative on the point for which it is offered than any other evidence which the proponent can procure through reasonable efforts; and the general purposes of these guidelines and the interests of justice will best be served by admission of the statement into evidence.
C - Examples of such statements are written statements, the authenticity of which can be shown in the absence of editing or tampering at a subsequent time by any person, records of the government or other authority, or substantiation of the statement by other evidence.
Rule of 18. Requirement of Authentication or Identification.
A - The requirement of authentication or identification as a condition precedent to admissibility is satisfied by evidence sufficient to support a finding that the matter in question is what its proponent claims.
Rule 19. Electronic Evidence.
A - Parties are responsible for documenting all forms of electronic evidence, such as forum posts, private messages, or NS telegrams before they are presented at trial.
B - Such material will include the location of the material (with an URL if available), including the poster or sender, the recipient, and the date stamp of the material, and any other objective information that tends to establish that the material is bona fide and not a fabrication.
C - Parties are responsible for providing a copy of all such documents to the other parties in the proceedings prior to trial.
D - Documents not furnished to all parties prior to trial may be excluded from the trial by the presiding judge.
Rule 20. Waiver
A - Parties and witnesses in a proceeding are entitled to assert any right or privilege protected for them under the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the Legal Code, or other recognized legal source.
B - A party or witness may waive the protection of any such right or privilege in a specific proceeding as to a specific matter, or may waive such protection as to all matters in a proceeding, or may waive such protection as to all proceedings. The record must identify the right or privilege that is being waived by the party or witness, and clearly identify the matter or matters to which the waiver extends.
Comments, Suggestions,?
Edit to Rule 2 and Rule 11 to correct use of "jury" to "Court."
Edit to Rule 6 on procedure to Court ruling on privileges.
Edit to add Rule 20 on waiver of a right or privilege.
