ABUBAKAR v CHUKS (2007) LPELR-52 (SC) stated: “The fact that a document has been admitted into evidence, with or without objection, does not necessarily mean that the document has proved or identified the evidence it contains, and must be accepted by the trial judge. It is not automatic. […] Are you confused about how to prove this document? Well, I don`t want to brag, but there is a useful article on this link on how to prove a document step by step. […] b. Disputed documents are presented by key witnesses on behalf of the calling party or by cross-examination by the opposing party. The admissibility of a document is one thing, the weight that the Court will attach to it is another. The weight that the Court attaches to the document depends on the circumstances of the case as they appear or are presented in the evidence. The identification of documents during the examination of witnesses may be carried out in one of the following ways: a. Uncontested documents may be submitted to the Bar Association with the consent of the lawyer in the matter. MANNIR ABDULLAHI V. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA SC.288/2012 Tagged: creation of a file, marking of documents for identification, offering of evidence When presenting evidence, ask the court to consider a document, photograph or other object as evidence in your case. To offer an item, you must: It is important to note that if a lawyer does not object to the admissibility of a document when it is important, it can be fatal to a case. It is not always true that the court can reject a document that has not been challenged on the grounds that it does not comply with the rules of evidence.

You are not obligated to testify unless you are in self-defense or provocation. Sometimes you have to testify. If the prosecution presents a reasonable case, you may need to share your version of events to convince the judge not to find you guilty. MRE 1003 states: “A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as an original unless (1) a genuine question is raised as to the authenticity of the original or (2) in the circumstances, it would be unreasonable to permit the duplicate in place of the original.” This alleviates some of the difficulties associated with producing originals. In law firms, in my experience, this is usually a low bar. Sometimes it is better not to testify. If the prosecution has not established the constituent elements, it cannot use your own evidence to support its case. If you choose to testify, you are usually the first witness for the defense. After that, you can call your witnesses and ask them questions, and they will also be cross-examined by the prosecution. Dispatches from the most remote outposts of civilization » After the prosecutor cross-examines your witness, you can ask him more questions.

It is only to clarify the answers or evidence given by this witness during cross-examination. You cannot raise new issues or information if the witness has not been questioned by the prosecutor about those issues.