a judge in criminal trials always has discretion to refuse to admit evidence if in his opinion its prejudicial

Question

effect outweighs its probative value...

what does this mean and any ideas to how the answer would be....

thanks so much

Answer 1

The rule you are referring to is Federal Rule of Evidence 403. Along with prejudice, it also allows exclusion of evidence if it confuses the issues or wastes time.

It means a judge can throw out evidence that is likely to be more inflammatory than helpful in proving anything. For example, in a murder case, a judge might think that photographs of the victim laying in a pool of blood are too prejudicial. After all, the jury already knows that the victim is dead, showing the pictures doesn't prove anything that the jury doesn't already know, but the pictures might incite the jury to convict the defendant simply because they want someone punished for such an awful death.

http://truepolitics.us

Answer 2

Most evidence suppressions are made by attorneys. They file motions to suppress. The judge has authority to accept or reject the motions on legal precedence.