I think the word "evidence" is mis-used in the question but, yes, unless the judge rules that information inadmissable, the jury can be advised that they are re-trying a case that originally resulted in a hung jury.
Yes, circumstantial evidence is admissible in court. It can be used to support a case and help establish guilt or innocence, but it is up to the judge or jury to determine its weight and credibility in reaching a verdict.
A hung jury.
A hung jury is unable to reach unanimity on a verdict.
We told the judge we were a hung jury.
Yes, if the evidence has already been ruled admissable in court, it can be used again. The more evidence that proves the point, the better.
Evidence produced by a specific event oraction; important in crime scene reconstruction and in determining the set of circumstances or sequence within a particular eventAnother View: Conditional Admissibility is the evidentiary rule that when a piece of evidence is not itself admissible, but is admissible if certain other facts make it relevant.Such evidence becomes admissible on condition that counsel later introduce the connecting facts. If counsel does not, or cannot, satisfy this condition, the opponent may ask the judge to strike from the record the conditionally admitted piece of evidence and to instruct the jury to disregard it
Yes. The evidence is presented in a courtroom. The jury hears it. The prosecutor presents his conclusion to the jury. The defense attorney presents his conclusion to the jury. The judge gives instructions to the jury. The jury goes to the jury room. The jury returns with the verdict. The term verdict is a fancy term for conclusion. Both sides heard the same evidence. The prosecutor presented evidence. The defense attorney presented evidence. In some cases there is a hung jury. That means one or more jurors heard the evidence and disagreed with the others and would not change his or her mind.
That depends on what "decide what the evidence is" means. The jury does not decide what evidence is admissible in the court; that is up to the judge, and is one of the judge's primary responsibilities. If the attorney for one side or the other thinks evidence should not be admitted, they can make a motion to suppress or exclude it on various grounds, or object during the trial. If the judge decides that the jury should not consider a certain piece of evidence that was introduced, he or she can instruct the jury to disregard it. The jury's only role is to decide whether the defendant is guilty or not (or to find for the plaintiff or the defendant in a civil case).
It is called a hung jury. See the link below
In a jury trial, the jury determines what facts are true. The judge plays a referee and determines what is admissible at law, what law is relevant, and makes sure the trial is run by the rules. In a jury trial, the judge performs both roles.
judge can mistrila or ask the jury for more deliberation
This is called a hung jury.