Which of the following is not a consequence of the use of character evidence in court?

The correct answer highlights a fundamental principle in the use of character evidence within the legal system. While character evidence can be pivotal in certain contexts, it is not always admissible, especially in criminal cases. The general rule is that evidence of a person's character to prove that they acted in accordance with that character on a specific occasion is not admissible. This is due to concerns about unfair prejudice and the potential to mislead the jury. There are specific exceptions where character evidence may be admissible, such as when a defendant introduces evidence of their own good character to counter allegations, or if the victim's character is relevant to the case.

In contrast, the other options reflect established uses and parameters of character evidence. For instance, it is true that character evidence may establish a defendant's propensity to behave in a certain way, and it can be relevant to specific circumstances of a case. Additionally, all evidence, including character evidence, must adhere to rules concerning relevance and materiality to be considered in court. This framework helps to safeguard the integrity of the judicial process by limiting the use of potentially prejudicial character evidence that could unduly sway a jury's opinion.