What is a key requirement for evidence to be considered admissible in court?

For evidence to be deemed admissible in court, one of the fundamental requirements is that it must be relevant to the case. Relevance means that the evidence has a tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence. If evidence does not relate directly to the issues at hand or help in establishing a fact in the case, it is unlikely to be accepted by the court, even if it is reliable or comes from a credible source.

The other options do not encapsulate the primary requirement for admissibility. Evidence does not need to be presented by a lawyer, as witnesses can testify directly without legal representation during their testimony. Furthermore, evidence can take many forms, such as oral testimony, physical objects, or electronically stored information, so it is not limited to written form. Finally, while eyewitness accounts can be a valuable form of evidence, admissibility isn't restricted to any specific type of source; hearsay and other forms of evidence can also be relevant as long as they meet the criteria for admissibility. Thus, relevance stands out as a pivotal criterion for any evidence to be considered in court.