Under what circumstance can public records be excluded in court?

Public records are generally considered reliable sources of evidence due to their official nature and the presumption that they are created with accuracy and integrity. However, these records can be excluded if their sources are shown to be untrustworthy. This means that if the opposing party can provide evidence or argument indicating that the information in the public record is not credible—perhaps due to inconsistencies, lack of verification, or questionable procedures used in its creation—the court may determine that such records should not be admitted as evidence during the proceedings. This principle aligns with the broader evidentiary rule concerning the reliability and credibility of evidence presented in court.

In contrast, records are not dependent on the identity of the entity keeping them; thus, having been kept by a private entity does not automatically render them inadmissible. Furthermore, even if records are irrelevant, they are typically excluded based on this irrelevance without consideration of their integrity. Finally, while alteration of records could affect their admissibility, the primary concern that warrants exclusion hinges on the trustworthiness of the sources providing the information, rather than solely on whether records have been altered.