0514

I would argue that what happened on other occasions with other trucks and other drivers has no probative value, and what happened to Arden on other occasions has little probative value, on the question of what happened when Arden was driving the truck on September 25. All the evidence has a substantial likelihood that it will confuse the issues and mislead the jury into deciding the case on what usually happens rather than what actually happened this time.

Balancing under Rule 403 involves two concepts -- probative value and prejudicial effect, so your objection should discuss both. You can’t just raise the prejudicial side of the equation.

Questions? E-mail tanford@indiana.edu and refer to 0514.

If you were the judge, would you let in any of the evidence? When you have decided, click here.