What distinguishes weight and admissibility in evidence?

The distinction between weight and admissibility in evidence is crucial for understanding how evidence is assessed in court. Admissibility refers to whether a piece of evidence can be considered by the court in the first place. This is typically based on legal standards, such as relevance and the absence of exclusionary rules. For example, evidence that is highly prejudicial may be deemed inadmissible despite its potential relevance.

Weight, on the other hand, pertains to the significance or persuasive value of the evidence once it is deemed admissible. After evidence is allowed, the court or jury assesses how much impact it should have on the decision-making process. Factors influencing weight include credibility of witnesses, consistency of the evidence with other facts, and the overall reliability of the evidence presented.

The correct answer captures the essence of this distinction by identifying both relevance versus weight — addressing how evidence must first be relevant and not violate rules of exclusion to be admissible — and fact versus law, which highlights the interplay between legal standards (law) determining admissibility and the individual facts of the case influencing weight.

By understanding these concepts, one gains insight into the dynamics of legal proceedings where certain evidence might be relevant but ultimately not persuasive, and vice versa. Recognizing that both relevance and the interpretation