- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
It's irrelevant to the case but wholly relevant to making KV shatter their little protec all whamen narrative.
It's relevant to the case, it's just more prejudicial than probative, probably. That means it's more likely to get the jury to find against Toye just because they hate him than because of what it proves that's relevant to the case. All that "relevant" means is that it makes a trier of fact more or less likely to find any material fact in the case.
The state of mind of the defendant and his character is therefore relevant especially when a relevant state of mind (actual malice) is material to the existence of an element of the cause of action, or some other aspect of the case, like the (different) kind of malice relevant to whether the defendant actually deserves to be punished with punitive damages.