What may outweigh the need to admit real evidence in court?

The reasoning for selecting physical inconvenience of bringing the object into court as a valid consideration relates to the practicalities of legal proceedings. Courts strive to ensure that trials are conducted efficiently and effectively. When an item of real evidence is overly cumbersome or impractical to transport, it may create significant disruptions in the court’s schedule, hinder the flow of the trial, or even lead to delays that could impede the administration of justice.

In some cases, the burden of bringing such evidence into the courtroom may outweigh its probative value. For instance, if the evidence is large, fragile, or could create logistical issues that detract from the overall conduct of the trial, a judge may decide that the inconvenience is sufficient to exclude the evidence despite its potential relevance. This consideration recognizes the balance between thorough fact-finding and the operational realities of running a courtroom.

Real evidence is critical, but the court system also has to prioritize its efficiency and effectiveness, making this particular concern about physical inconvenience a legitimate factor in the decision-making process regarding evidence admissibility.