U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 08-01-2011, 03:15 PM
 
608 posts, read 530,411 times
Reputation: 33

Advertisements

Considering that evidence is most important in human affairs for the ascertainment of facts and the choice of which opinion is the most acceptable as the grounds for making decisions in matters of the most urgent necessity for humans, and we here are all humans, it behooves all humans to exchange thoughts on what is the law of evidence and what the rules of evidence, and how are they different.

I am myself not in government's thinking on the law of evidence and the rules of evidence, that is why I am introducing this thread, for us all humans to work together, to find our what is the government's thoughts and impositions in regard to evidence to maintain peace and order and prosperity in the citizenry.

This is an invitation to everyone to chip in on what is the law of evidence, what are the rules of evidence, and what is the difference between them, in government's thoughts and impositions where evidence is involved.



Ryrge

 
Old 08-01-2011, 03:43 PM
 
Location: Florida
19,792 posts, read 19,895,713 times
Reputation: 23207
I ,respectfully, of course, ask how that subject fits in this forum?
 
Old 08-01-2011, 04:05 PM
 
608 posts, read 530,411 times
Reputation: 33
Yes of course, it is about philosophy the one government uses in the matter of evidence.


Ryrge
 
Old 08-01-2011, 04:09 PM
 
608 posts, read 530,411 times
Reputation: 33
Anyway, I will defer to you in the choice of a board here in this website where humans like ourselves can work together to find out what is the difference between the law of evidence and the rules of evidence in the government.


Ryrge
 
Old 08-01-2011, 04:22 PM
 
Location: Logan Township, Minnesota
15,511 posts, read 13,282,205 times
Reputation: 7407
Keep in mind it was back in ancient history when I last did any serious study of law. But in simple terms and what my simple mind remembers.

Laws of evidence regulate how evidence can be procured and what steps need to be taken to keep it valid and unchanged.

Rules of evidence determine the reliability of evidence and what can be considered evidence. For example I might be a total slime ball who kicks puppies and barbecues kittens, even if that could be proven through evidence. But if I am on trial for jay walking, that most likely would not have any bearing on if I was jay walking and the rules of evidence would not allow it to be presented in my jay walking trial.

BTW I do not even like barbecue-----The fact I do not like BBQ and beer was considered treason and got me kicked out of Texas and that is how I ended up in ND.
 
Old 08-01-2011, 05:24 PM
 
608 posts, read 530,411 times
Reputation: 33
Default My instinct is always to deal with concepts first before anything else.

Excuse me if I may, why bother to find out what is the law of evidence and the rules of evidence in government?

Well, simple, because we are living under a government, that is why.

So?

So it is wise to find out what government thinks and imposes in regard to concepts and principles on its citizenry to direct the citizenry in the grand business of peace and order and prosperity for the whole citizenry.

And most probably we might get some useful ideas from the government on what is evidence, what is the target of evidence, and what is the mechanism by which evidence works.

And see whether these ideas from the government can be applied to other fields of inquiry like on God or no God, on beauty, on medicine, on business, on human rights, etc.



Here, I find this definition of evidence from a law dictionary that is very popular for its presenting law matters in precise yet concise and clear, plain, simple language:


Quote:
Originally Posted by Nolo’s Plain-English Law Dictionary
The many types of information presented to a judge or jury designed to convince them of the truth or falsity of key facts. Evidence typically includes testimony of witnesses, documents, photographs, items of damaged property, government records, videos, and laboratory reports. Strict rules limit what can be properly admitted as evidence, but dozens of exceptions often mean that creative lawyers find a way to introduce such testimony or other items into evidence. (See: admissible evidence, inadmissible evidence) [ evidence definition - Nolo's Free Dictionary of Law Terms and Legal Definitions ].
If anyone sees that I am not going about the topic of this thread correctly, just tell me and I will see what should be done consulting you to keep to the topic of the thread, okay?

You will notice that my instinct is always to work first on the concepts, because otherwise we will be talking unconsciously at least past each other's head.


Ryrge
 
Old 08-01-2011, 06:01 PM
 
Location: City-Data Forum
7,945 posts, read 4,740,489 times
Reputation: 1328
In government and court affairs, truth matters very little as much as the peace of the citizenry, in that once all parties involved in a struggle are quiet... so is the matter. and then the politicians/lawyery must move on to the next problem/case. This is clearly understandable and observable. Woodrow LI, has a very acceptable explanation... which shows that evidence must be kept within the boundaries of the complaints so as to make the bill/case expedient. so then laws of evidence are the laws by which evidence must be procured and maintained in order that no one complains. rules of evidence are what types of evidence matters for the particular subject so that the subject is not diviated or adulterized with non-applying info that might make the Judge or jury have an unneeded bias and thus have someone complain about how the bias got involved and the judgment was poluted with bias and thus the verdict was not fair. This I gathered merely from Woodrow and my own conjectures, I'm not sure if these are the correct definitions, but if they are, I'm quite certain my applications are correct.

So to make things expedient and peaceful, evidence must be vetted before it is presented, and the ways evidence is gathered and handled must be controled; in order that there are no complaints/grievences. whether or not the evidence applies to demonstrate a proposition doesn't matter as much as the fact that no one complains.
 
Old 08-01-2011, 06:09 PM
 
608 posts, read 530,411 times
Reputation: 33
Default Thanks for your contribution, please don't be annoyed, tell me the difference in brief exact words.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodrow LI View Post

Keep in mind it was back in ancient history when I last did any serious study of law. But in simple terms and what my simple mind remembers.

Laws of evidence regulate how evidence can be procured and what steps need to be taken to keep it valid and unchanged.

Rules of evidence determine the reliability of evidence and what can be considered evidence. For example I might be a total slime ball who kicks puppies and barbecues kittens, even if that could be proven through evidence. But if I am on trial for jay walking, that most likely would not have any bearing on if I was jay walking and the rules of evidence would not allow it to be presented in my jay walking trial.

BTW I do not even like barbecue-----The fact I do not like BBQ and beer was considered treason and got me kicked out of Texas and that is how I ended up in ND.
Thanks for your contribution, please don't be annoyed, tell me the difference in brief exact words.

Between law of evidence and rules of evidence.

Allow me to analyze your words and determine the difference between law of evidence and rules of evidence in your message above.
[Bolding and enumeration from Ryrge]
1. Laws of evidence regulate how evidence can be procured and what steps need to be taken to keep it valid and unchanged.

2. Rules of evidence determine the reliability of evidence and what can be considered evidence. For example I might be a total slime ball who kicks puppies and barbecues kittens, even if that could be proven through evidence. But if I am on trial for jay walking, that most likely would not have any bearing on if I was jay walking and the rules of evidence would not allow it to be presented in my jay walking trial.
If I may, according to you, 1. law of evidence is concerned with collection of evidence and its preservation, while 2. rules of evidence are concerned with relevancy of evidence to the target of evidence.

Does that sound like what you want to tell readers and every poster here?

If not, then tell us what is the difference between law of evidence and rules of evidence in more precise language.


By the way, it is law of evidence, not laws of evidence.



Ryrge
 
Old 08-01-2011, 06:22 PM
 
608 posts, read 530,411 times
Reputation: 33
Default Thanks for your contribution, Luminous Truth, except for one item.

Thanks for your contribution, Luminous Truth, except for one item, see below in your message put in bold by yours truly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LuminousTruth View Post
In government and court affairs, truth matters very little as much as the peace of the citizenry, in that once all parties involved in a struggle are quiet... so is the matter. and then the politicians/lawyery must move on to the next problem/case. This is clearly understandable and observable. Woodrow LI, has a very acceptable explanation... which shows that evidence must be kept within the boundaries of the complaints so as to make the bill/case expedient. so then laws of evidence are the laws by which evidence must be procured and maintained in order that no one complains. rules of evidence are what types of evidence matters for the particular subject so that the subject is not diviated or adulterized with non-applying info that might make the Judge or jury have an unneeded bias and thus have someone complain about how the bias got involved and the judgment was poluted with bias and thus the verdict was not fair. This I gathered merely from Woodrow and my own conjectures, I'm not sure if these are the correct definitions, but if they are, I'm quite certain my applications are correct.

So to make things expedient and peaceful, evidence must be vetted before it is presented, and the ways evidence is gathered and handled must be controled; in order that there are no complaints/grievences. whether or not the evidence applies to demonstrate a proposition doesn't matter as much as the fact that no one complains.

Do you care to revise your words:
In government and court affairs, truth matters very little as much as the peace of the citizenry, in that once all parties involved in a struggle are quiet... so is the matter. and then the politicians/lawyery must move on to the next problem/case.
Your position seems to be rather cynical about government people or politicians and lawyers.

But if you insist not to revise I will not just keep your thought in this connection in mind in my memory.



Ryrge
 
Old 08-01-2011, 06:30 PM
 
Location: Logan Township, Minnesota
15,511 posts, read 13,282,205 times
Reputation: 7407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryrge View Post
Thanks for your contribution, please don't be annoyed, tell me the difference in brief exact words.
If I may, according to you, 1. law of evidence is concerned with collection of evidence and its preservation, while 2. rules of evidence are concerned with relevancy of evidence to the target of evidence.

Does that sound like what you want to tell readers and every poster here?

By the way, it is law of evidence, not laws of evidence.

Ryrge
You said what I intended, better than I did.


thank you.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top