What is required to meet the threshold of relevance in court proceedings?

The threshold of relevance in court proceedings is met when there is a possibility that the evidence could affect the case. Relevance does not require absolute certainty or direct connections; rather, it hinges on whether the evidence has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence. This concept recognizes the inherent uncertainty in litigation and acknowledges that even evidence which may only slightly influence a jury's understanding of the facts can be deemed relevant.

The legal standard often employed is that evidence is relevant if it relates to any material issue in the case, even if it doesn't directly prove or disprove a central element. This allows for a broader range of evidence, including circumstantial evidence, to be considered, as long as it can potentially affect the outcome.