Dr. Bob examines Billy but neglects to make notes about the examination. Six months later, he remembers and makes notes. If there's litigation and the notes are offered into evidence, what admissibilty has Dr. Bob created?
A. Entry not made at the time of the event
B. Entry not made by someone with knowledge of the event
C. Entry not witnessed
D. There are no admissibility problems
Three of these answers are clearly wrong. Which do you think is correct?
I think A is the correct answer but then I keep second guessing myself. I know it's not B OR C
It is A I am taking the same class u are
I agree with both of you. The correct answer is A.
Thanks for the reassurance! How far along are you on the lessons? It keeps getting tougher!
Thanks!
The admissibility problem that Dr. Bob has created by making notes about the examination six months later is option A: entry not made at the time of the event.
To understand why this is an admissibility problem, let's break it down:
In a litigation scenario, when evidence is offered, it needs to meet certain requirements to be deemed admissible in court. These requirements generally relate to the reliability and trustworthiness of the evidence. One key requirement is that the evidence should be contemporaneous, meaning it should be created at or around the time of the event it documents.
In this case, Dr. Bob neglected to make notes about the examination when he examined Billy. Instead, he made the notes six months later, which makes them non-contemporaneous. This lack of contemporaneity raises questions about the accuracy, reliability, and credibility of the notes. The court may view them as less reliable compared to if the notes were made at the time of the examination.
Therefore, Dr. Bob has created an admissibility problem by making notes about the examination six months later, as the notes are not considered contemporaneous with the event they document.