When does the Best Evidence Rule NOT apply?

The Best Evidence Rule primarily dictates that when a party seeks to prove the content of a writing, recording, or photograph, they must provide the original document or a reliable duplicate. However, this rule does not apply when the facts being presented are independent of the writing itself.

For instance, if a witness testifies about their observations of an event without needing to reference a specific document to substantiate their testimony, the Best Evidence Rule is not implicated. This can involve scenarios where the fact of a situation, such as the occurrence of an event, can be established through witness testimony or other forms of evidence that do not rely on written documents. In such cases, the core facts do not necessitate the use of the document's content, therefore making the Best Evidence Rule inapplicable.

In contrast, the other options reference specific conditions under which the rule may still be relevant, such as the nature of the document (e.g., public record or digital format) or its role in a case (e.g., corroborative evidence). However, when the evidence is strictly about facts that stand alone and do not hinge on the document's contents, the Best Evidence Rule does not apply.