Final answer:
The court should decide if Charlie's testimony about Sally 'always speeding' and 'never paying attention' is admissible. Typically, character evidence is not admissible to show conduct on a specific occasion, and the court may find this testimony to be inadmissible because it is prejudicial and not focused on the incident in question.
Step-by-step explanation:
In the context of a trial, Lucy wishes to call Sally's brother, Charlie, to testify that Sally 'is always speeding, and never pays attention to the road when driving.' However, Sally objects to this testimony. The court will need to decide whether Charlie's testimony is admissible evidence under the rules of evidence. The testimony could potentially be considered character evidence, which is often inadmissible when used to attest to a person's actions on a specific occasion.
Since Charlie is claiming a general disposition (Sally's tendency to speed and her lack of attention), rather than providing direct evidence about the specific incident in question, the court may rule this testimony as inadmissible. To maintain a fair trial, the court scrutinizes such evidence because it may be prejudicial and not directly prove the disputed actions of a specific event.