The Rule Excluding Evidence of Similar Facts with Special Reference to Non-Jury Trials*

Abstract

Hold, hold, what are you doing now? Are you going toarraign his whole life? How can he defend himself fromcharges of which he has no notice? And how many issuesare to be raised to perplex me and the jury? Away, away!That ought not to be: that is nothing to the matter.Holt, L.C.J., Harrison's Trial(1692) 12 How. St. Tr. 833, 864.Exclusion of evidence of similar facts has not been specifically dealt with in the law of Israel and therefore, according to Art. 46 of the Palestine Order-in-Council, 1922, English common law rules have been applied by the courts as a matter of course despite the absence of the jury system in this country—and regardless of the stipulation at the end of Art. 46. The influence of these rules, as applied in criminal cases, is the main theme of this article.In the words of J. Stone, … a fact is similar to another only when the common characteristic is the significant one for the purpose of the inquiry at hand. When facts having characteristics in common with the main fact are tendered in evidence, the court must ascertain which common characteristics are the significant ones in order to determine relevance.