An airline passenger nearly killed in a crash is suing the airline for personal injuries. To prove the extent of his injuries, t
he passenger offers a videotape taken by a local news station immediately after the crash that shows serious burns covering much of the passenger's face. The airline moves to exclude the videotape on grounds that its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. In making his ruling, which of the following is NOT appropriate for the judge to consider:
A) The videotape will make it more likely that the passenger will win the suit.
B) There are other methods of proving the passenger's damages.
C) The videotape can be restricted to its proper purpose by instructing the jury to disregard any possible emotional appeal.
D) the videotape will encourage the jury to decide the suit on an emotional basis.
Answer: A) The videotape will make it more likely that the passenger will win the suit.
Explanation:
The fact is that evidence tends to favor one party over the other. The Judge therefore should not begin to consider the likelihood that the videotape would help the passenger win their suit because as said, evidence helps one party over another so the Judge doing this is a fruitless endeavor.
Rather the Judge should focus on deciding if the probative value of the tape is more or less than the danger the video poses of unfair prejudice.
Government can play a role in reducing negative externalities by taxing goods when their production generates spillover costs. This taxation effectively increases the cost of producing such goods. ... The use of such a tax is called internalizing the externality.
