During a trial, the defense attorney objects to the prosecution's introduction of a letter allegedly written by the defendant, arguing that its authenticity has not been established. The prosecution then offers to present a witness who can testify to the letter's authenticity. What should the judge do regarding the prosecution's offer of proof?
Allow the prosecution to present the witness to establish authenticity and decide based on that testimony.
Sustain the objection and exclude the letter from evidence.
Require the prosecution to provide additional documentary evidence instead of a witness.
Overrule the objection and allow the letter into evidence without further testimony.
The correct response is to allow the prosecution to present the witness to establish authenticity. This follows the procedural rules allowing a party to offer proof to overcome an objection regarding authentication. The other options fail to recognize the proper use of offers of proof or incorrectly require alternative methods of authentication.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What is meant by 'authentication' in a legal context?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What are 'offers of proof' in court proceedings?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What are the consequences of insufficiently authenticating evidence?