Первичные источники: что они включают
Первичные источники – это непосредственные свидетельства по теме от людей, которые имели прямое отношение к ней. Среди первичных источников можно выделить:
- Тексты законов и другие оригинальные документы.
- Газетные сообщения, написанные журналистами, которые были свидетелями события или цитируют других людей.
- Речи, дневники, письма и интервью – то, что сказали или написали участники.
- Данные, наборы данных, такие как перепись населения или экономическая статистика.
- Фотографии, видео или аудио, запечатлившие событие.
Вопросы суммирования доказательств
Для доказательств, допущенных в уголовные процессы, они должны быть соответствующими, материальными и компетентными. Это означает, что доказательства должны помочь доказать или опровергнуть какой-то факт в деле. Это не обязательно должно сделать факт определенным, но по крайней мере оно должно способствовать увеличению или уменьшению вероятности некоторого спорного факта. Доказательство компетентно, если оно соответствует определенным традиционным представлениям о надежности.
Обзор
Библиотека UW имеет полное руководство, переходящее в Интернете под названием Оценка информации, который обсуждает разные типы источников и способы оценки их достоверности.
Что означает, что источник достоверен/надежен, может варьироваться в зависимости от контекста его использования. В общем, достоверный и надежный источник – это тот, с которым согласились бы эксперты в вашей предметной области для ваших целей. Это может варьироваться, поэтому лучше всего использовать один из методов оценки источников, который лучше всего подходит вам. Помните, что надежность зависит от контекста!
Важно критически оценивать источники, потому что использование достоверных/надежных источников делает вас более информированным автором. Подумайте об ненадежных источниках как о загрязнителях вашей доверенности – если включите ненадежные источники в вашу работу, ваша работа может потерять доверие в результате.
Таблица: Типы первичных источников
Примарные и вторичные источники: вопросник
- Автор лично наблюдал или испытал объект вопроса?
- Автор владеет информацией об этом объекте из-за личного опыта, а не просто прочтения об этом?
- Является ли этот источник дневником, письмом, мемуарами, автобиографией, устной историей или интервью с человеком, обладающим первоначальным опытом по теме?
- Является ли этот источник статьей из газеты или журнала, написанной во время события?
- Является ли это творческим произведением, например, романом, стихом, произведением искусства или музыкой, созданным свидетелями события?
- Является ли это отрывком из первичного источника, такого как конституция или письмо, написанный солдатом Гражданской войны, который был вложен во вторичный источник, например, учебник? Помните, что вторичные источники могут включать перепечатки первичных источников.
- Является ли это артефактом или находкой, такими как ювелирные украшения, керамика, одежда, музыка, искусство, архитектура, танец или оружие, используемые свидетелями предмета вопроса?
Оценка источников на достоверность
Инструменты искусственного интеллекта и важность добавления своих собственных исследований
Аутентичность, достоверность и надежность
Evidence is “hearsay” if it is a statement (that is, an “assertion,” either oral or written), made by the declarant (i.e., the person who made the statement) at any time or place other than while testifying in court at the current trial or hearing, and the statement is being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. See, G.S. 8C-801, 802; State v. Burke, 343 N.C. 129 (1996). For example, if a trial witness such as a law enforcement officer attempted to testify about what an eyewitness at the scene of the crime said that he or she saw, and that statement was offered to establish that the events transpired as the witness reported, the statement would be inadmissible hearsay unless another statute or rule authorized the admission of the statement. See State v. Banks, 210 N.C. App. 30 (2011).
Pursuant to Rules 801(a) and 802, the prohibition against hearsay testimony also applies to nonverbal conduct of the declarant (such as a nod or gesture), if that conduct is intended as an assertion. See, e.g., State v. Robinson, 355 N.C. 320 (2002) (testimony from one witness about whether another witness had pointed anyone out in a mug shot book was inadmissible hearsay); State v. Marlow, 334 N.C. 273 (1993) (“Howell’s actions of attempting to give Horton the tape player and later attempting to give him a twenty-dollar bill were nonverbal assertions also constituting hearsay”); State v. Satterfield, 316 N.C. 55 (1986) (declarant’s gesture, in response to officer’s question, of pointing to the drawer where knife could be found was nonverbal conduct intended as an assertion, and therefore inadmissible as hearsay).
Not Hearsay by Definition
In addition to the statutory hearsay exceptions listed above, there are many situations in which the statement of a declarant is admissible simply because it does not fall within the scope of Rule 801 and therefore it is not subject to exclusion. Several of the most common examples of these kinds of statements are summarized below.
Not Offered for the Truth
A declarant’s statement is not excluded as hearsay under Rule 801 if it is not being offered for the truth of the matter asserted (i.e., “the defendant did X”), but rather for some other permissible purpose such as explaining the defendant’s motive or showing the victim’s state of mind (e.g., “I was scared of the defendant because I heard he did X”). See, e.g., State v. McLean, 251 N.C. App. 850 (2017) (witness’s statement that jailer told her the defendant was in an adjacent cell was not hearsay, because it was offered for the nonhearsay purpose of explaining why the witness was afraid to testify); State v. Castaneda, 215 N.C. App. 144 (2011) (statements in detective’s interview with defendant about what other witnesses allegedly saw defendant do were not hearsay, because they were offered for the nonhearsay purpose of giving context to the defendant’s answers and explaining the detective’s interview technique); State v. Brown, 350 N.C. 193 (1999) (statements made to victim about getting a divorce were not offered for truth of the matter); State v. Davis, 349 N.C. 1 (1998) (statements about defendant being fired were offered for nonhearsay purpose of showing motive); State v. Dickens, 346 N.C. 26 (1997) (recording of statements made in 911 call was admissible for nonhearsay purpose of showing that call took place and that the accomplice was the caller); State v. Holder, 331 N.C. 462 (1992) (statement properly admitted to show state of mind); State v. Tucker, 331 N.C. 12 (1992) (“trial court erred in precluding admission of the statements because they were either nonhearsay or admissible under a hearsay exception”); State v. Woodruff, 99 N.C. App. 107 (1990) (“Clearly, these statements were not offered to ‘prove the truth of the matter asserted.’ This contention borders on the frivolous.”); State v. Quick, 323 N.C. 675 (1989) (victim’s letter to murder defendant and testimony of victim’s grandmother were not hearsay where they were offered to show that defendant’s motive for killing victim was because she wished to discontinue their romantic relationship); State v. Hunt, 323 N.C. 407 (1988) (witness’ statement that his wife took out insurance policy on her other husband and said that she did it to have him killed, was not offered for truth of the matter, but for the nonhearsay purpose of proving why codefendants conspired to kill her other husband)
Explains Conduct or Effect on the Listener
Don’t overdo itDespite the abundance of helpful cases on this issue, prosecutors should be cautious about overusing this argument as a fallback basis for getting challenged statements into evidence as nonhearsay. If the statement is not offered for the truth of the matter asserted, the prosecutor may not rely on it for that purpose either, so the value of the statement as evidence may be diminished. See, e.g., State v. Angram, 270 N.C. App. 82 (2020) (where the only statements directly linking defendant to robbery were admitted for a limited nonhearsay purpose, there was insufficient evidence to support conviction). For further discussion, see Jeff Welty, "The ‘Explains Conduct’ Non-Hearsay Purpose," N.C. Criminal Law Blog, Oct. 13, 2009.
Corroboration of Testimony
Rule 801 allows, as nonhearsay, “the entire category of ‘verbal acts’ and ‘verbal parts of an act,’ in which the statement itself affects the legal rights of the parties or is a circumstance bearing on conduct affecting their rights.” G.S. 8C-801, Official Commentary. For example, if the statement itself constitutes an act under the law (such as offering a bribe or granting permission), the statement is not excluded by Rule 801. See, e.g., State v. Weaver, 160 N.C. App. 61 (2003) (defendant’s offer to pay officer money if he would ignore the drugs that he found was a verbal act of offering a bribe); see also 2 McCormick On Evid. § 249 (7th ed., 2016) (collecting cases and examples of other verbal acts).
Not an “Assertion”
However, if the context or substance of the question or directive indicates that it should be understood as an “assertion” and it is being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted, then the question or directive should be viewed as a statement subject to the hearsay rules. See, e.g., State v. McQueen, 324 N.C. 118 (1989) (question that a companion asked the defendant – “you don’t remember killing a state trooper?” – was inadmissible hearsay since it was offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted: namely, that the defendant had no recollection of the killing); State v. Marlow, 334 N.C. 273 (1993) (“Clearly, Horton’s oral assertion that he told Howell ‘not to come back around. To stay away,’ constituted hearsay under Rule 801(a).”).
Composite Sketch
Different types of evidence are available in a criminal case. The four primary forms of evidence are:
Demonstrative Evidence
For example, emails are electronically stored. If a party wishes to admit this as evidence, they must print out the emails. But suppose a party raises questions about the authenticity of a document. For example, the other side submitted a copy of a lease that only included some of the terms. In that case, the court will request the original document.
Real Evidence
A trial judge will weigh the probative value of the evidence. This is the evidence’s ability to make a fact more or less likely to be true. This is balanced against the danger of unfair prejudice.
Examples of Primary and Secondary Sources
Primary SourcesSecondary Sources
Artwork Article critiquing the piece of art
Diary Book about a specific subject
Performance Review of play
Poem Treatise on a particular genre of poetry
Treaty Essay on a treaty
are one step removed from primary sources, though they often quote or otherwise use primary sources. They can cover the same topic, but add a layer of interpretation and analysis. Secondary sources can include:
Most books about a topic.
Analysis or interpretation of data.
Scholarly or other articles about a topic, especially by people not directly involved.
Documentaries (though they often include photos or video portions that can be considered primary sources).
Books
Practice guidlines provide evidence-based guidelines for providing specific interventions. Books are often a good source of practice guidelines.
Frameworks
There are certain frameworks that information professionals have put together to help people think critically about the information provided.
Some of the methods that UW Libraries suggest are:
5 W Questions (5Ws): This method means thinking critically about each of your sources by answering five questions to determine if the source is credible/reliable. The acceptable answers to these questions will vary depending on your needs. The questions are:
SMART Check: This method is particularly good at evaluating newspaper sources. Like the 5Ws method it also involves answering critical questions about your source. The criteria are:
CRAAP Test: This method provides you with a set of criteria that make a source more or less credible. The criteria are:
Websites
In general, caution is recommended when relying on websites for evidence-based information. Peer-reviewed journal articles based on research studies are your best sources of evidence-based information. However, there are some selected websites that feature practice guidelines written by experts in a particular field.
Suppressing Inadmissible Evidence
So, for example, if one side can show that a blood sample was not properly labeled or a weapon wasn’t properly locked and stored in an evidence room, there’s no way to trust the results of any subsequent blood test or fingerprint analysis. While this evidence may be relevant and material, it’s not competent. There are intervening custody problems that may lead to inaccurate test results.
Library Databases
Whether something is a primary or secondary source often depends upon the topic and its use.
A biology textbook would be considered a secondary source if in the field of biology, since it describes and interprets the science but makes no original contribution to it.
On the other hand, if the topic is science education and the history of textbooks, textbooks could be used a primary sources to look at how they have changed over time.
Additional Help
If you would like personalized support from UW Libraries on source evaluation you can
Sources for Evidence-Based Practice (EBP)
Research that informs evidence-based practice comes from several sources. These sources include, peer-reviewed journal articles, randomized clinical trials, and clinical trials. Occasionally, books and selected websites can be good sources of reliable, evidence-based information. This page lists sources research articles, books, and web sites that contribute to evidence-based practice.