When is the absence of a public record considered admissible?

The absence of a public record is considered admissible when it can be shown that it demonstrates a matter did not occur, provided that the agency in question routinely records such matters. This situation arises under the hearsay exception concerning public records. The rationale is that if an agency regularly maintains official records regarding certain events or facts, then the absence of a record for a specific event suggests that the event likely did not occur. This principle is rooted in the idea that official agencies are expected to document their activities consistently, so a lack of documentation in specific cases can be telling and relevant to the matters at hand.

This approach highlights how the absence of documentation itself serves as a form of evidence. It allows for the inference that, because the agency typically records such occurrences but did not do so in this instance, it is reasonable to conclude that the event did not take place. Thus, this context is crucial for understanding why this answer reflects the proper application of evidentiary standards concerning public records.