What does "relevance threshold" signify in legal evidence?

The term "relevance threshold" in legal evidence refers to the requirement that evidence must relate to the facts in dispute and provide insight into those facts. This means that for evidence to be admissible in court, it must have the ability to make a fact of consequence more or less probable than it would be without the evidence. This ensures that the evidence presented is pertinent to the case and can assist the judge or jury in making informed decisions about the issues at hand.

For example, if a piece of evidence can help establish a person’s motive, opportunity, or intent, it meets the relevance threshold. This connection to the substantive issues being litigated underlines the importance of this concept in the legal context.

In contrast, the other options do not encapsulate the essence of the relevance threshold. Evidence being entertaining, previously documented, or gathered from all possible sources do not ensure that such evidence is relevant, nor do they inherently relate to its admissibility in the context of the facts at issue. Relevance focuses specifically on how the evidence pertains to the case rather than these other considerations.