Loading
Federal Rules of Evidence
6 min read
Published Date:
Last Modified Date:
Federal Rule of Evidence 107 governs illustrative aids used to help the factfinder understand evidence or argument without treating those materials as evidence themselves. This article explains how Rule 107 applies to expert witness demonstratives, how illustrative aids differ from substantive evidence and Rule 1006 summaries, and what attorneys should consider when using charts, diagrams, animations, simulations, and other visual aids at trial.
In proceedings governed by the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 107 governs illustrative aids presented to help the trier of fact understand evidence or argument without being offered as evidence. Effective December 1, 2024, the rule can apply to materials such as charts, diagrams, photographs, video depictions, graphs, and computer simulations when they are used as illustrative aids.
When experts use animations, calculation charts, anatomical diagrams, or other visual presentations, the key question is whether the material is used only to help explain evidence or argument or is offered to prove a disputed fact. That distinction helps determine whether Rule 107 or the rules governing substantive evidence apply.
This guide explains Rule 107's requirements, how illustrative aids differ from substantive evidence and Rule 1006 summaries, and how the rule applies to expert witness demonstratives.
Rule 107 contains four principal provisions governing illustrative aids:
Permitted use: The court may allow an aid if it helps the trier of fact understand evidence or argument and its usefulness is not substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, or wasted time.
Jury deliberations: An illustrative aid is not evidence and generally may not go to the jury room unless all parties consent or the court finds good cause.
Trial record: When practicable, an aid used at trial must be entered into the record.
Rule 1006 distinction: A qualifying summary, chart, or calculation admitted as evidence to prove the content of voluminous admissible writings, recordings, or photographs that cannot be conveniently examined in court is governed by Rule 1006.
The Advisory Committee also states that Rule 107 applies throughout trial, including opening statements and closing arguments. The rule contains no general advance-notice requirement, so the trial judge may determine whether, when, and how advance notice is required.
In proceedings governed by the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 107 governs illustrative aids presented to help the trier of fact understand evidence or argument without being offered as evidence. Effective December 1, 2024, the rule can apply to materials such as charts, diagrams, photographs, video depictions, graphs, and computer simulations when they are used as illustrative aids.
When experts use animations, calculation charts, anatomical diagrams, or other visual presentations, the key question is whether the material is used only to help explain evidence or argument or is offered to prove a disputed fact. That distinction helps determine whether Rule 107 or the rules governing substantive evidence apply.
This guide explains Rule 107's requirements, how illustrative aids differ from substantive evidence and Rule 1006 summaries, and how the rule applies to expert witness demonstratives.
Rule 107 contains four principal provisions governing illustrative aids:
Permitted use: The court may allow an aid if it helps the trier of fact understand evidence or argument and its usefulness is not substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, or wasted time.
Jury deliberations: An illustrative aid is not evidence and generally may not go to the jury room unless all parties consent or the court finds good cause.
Trial record: When practicable, an aid used at trial must be entered into the record.
Rule 1006 distinction: A qualifying summary, chart, or calculation admitted as evidence to prove the content of voluminous admissible writings, recordings, or photographs that cannot be conveniently examined in court is governed by Rule 1006.
The Advisory Committee also states that Rule 107 applies throughout trial, including opening statements and closing arguments. The rule contains no general advance-notice requirement, so the trial judge may determine whether, when, and how advance notice is required.
For distinguishing an illustrative aid from substantive evidence, the purpose for which a visual is offered is more important than its format. The three categories differ in an important way:
Illustrative aid: Helps the factfinder understand evidence or argument but is not itself evidence. Rule 107 governs material used solely for this purpose.
Substantive demonstrative evidence: Demonstrative material offered to prove a disputed fact is substantive evidence if admitted and is governed by the rules applicable to evidence rather than Rule 107.
Rule 1006 summary: A qualifying summary, chart, or calculation may be admitted as evidence to prove the contents of voluminous admissible writings, recordings, or photographs that cannot be conveniently examined in court.
The Advisory Committee chose the term illustrative aid because "demonstrative evidence" had been used inconsistently. Rule 1006 also makes clear that a summary used only as an illustrative aid falls under Rule 107.
A calculation chart used only to explain testimony may therefore fall under Rule 107, while a qualifying chart offered to prove the contents of voluminous records may be admitted under Rule 1006.
Expert witness demonstratives may include diagrams, animations, financial charts, testing graphs, timelines, and computer simulations. Rule 107 can govern these materials when they are used solely to help explain evidence, including expert testimony, or argument.
Rule 107 does not make the expert's underlying opinion admissible. Federal Rule of Evidence 702 separately governs expert testimony. The witness must be qualified by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, and the proponent must demonstrate to the court, more likely than not, that Rule 702(a) through (d) are satisfied. An illustrative aid cannot substitute for those requirements.
Rule 703 may also matter when a demonstrative displays otherwise inadmissible facts or data of a type that experts in the particular field would reasonably rely on in forming an opinion on the subject. Placing that information in a slide, diagram, or animation does not independently authorize its disclosure to the jury. If the proponent seeks to disclose that information, its probative value in helping the jury evaluate the expert's opinion must substantially outweigh its prejudicial effect.
The Supreme Court adopted Federal Rule of Evidence 107 on April 2, 2024, authorized its transmission to Congress, and provided for an effective date of December 1, 2024.
The proposal was originally published as Rule 611(d). During rulemaking, the Advisory Committee removed a proposed general notice requirement and extended the rule to openings and closings. It also adopted the current "substantially outweighed" balancing standard, clarified that illustrative aids are not evidence, and relocated the provision to Rule 107.
In Williams v. Tregre, No. 23-1095 (E.D. La. June 11, 2025), the court applied Rule 107 to a video animation. It denied the motion to exclude without prejudice to trial objections and allowed the animation to be used with witnesses if the plaintiffs laid an appropriate foundation and made clear that it was an illustration rather than a recreation. The court barred its use during opening statement, admission as evidence, and use during deliberations.
In Keefe v. Britt's Bow Wow Boutique, Inc., Nos. 23-14024 & 24-11252 (11th Cir. May 23, 2025) (unpublished), the Eleventh Circuit discussed Rule 107 while reviewing a calculation chart used during closing argument. Because the trial predated Rule 107, Rule 611(a) governed. Considering both frameworks, the court found no abuse of discretion and observed that, based on the materials available for appellate review, the chart did not appear to introduce new evidence.
In United States v. Baskerville, 164 F.4th 459 (6th Cir. 2026), the Sixth Circuit noted in a footnote that Rule 107 now expressly addresses illustrative aids. The challenged phone charts, however, were admitted into evidence, and the Sixth Circuit analyzed them as "secondary-evidence summaries" under its precedent involving Rules 611 and 1006.
Attorneys and experts should first determine the purpose of the proposed visual. If it merely explains testimony or argument, Rule 107 may apply. If it is offered as proof, another evidentiary framework may control.
Before trial, counsel should also consider whether:
The visual accurately reflects the expert's testimony and underlying evidence.
Technical assumptions, measurements, timing, scale, and data inputs are clearly identifiable.
The presentation could make disputed assumptions appear more certain than the evidence supports.
The visual includes otherwise inadmissible material.
Local rules, standing orders, or pretrial orders require advance disclosure.
The record clearly identifies the visual as an illustrative aid rather than admitted evidence.
Is a Rule 107 illustrative aid evidence?
No. Rule 107 expressly states that an illustrative aid is not evidence. Its function is to help the factfinder understand evidence or argument.
Can an expert use an animation or computer simulation under Rule 107?
Yes, potentially. Animations and computer simulations can qualify as illustrative aids when used to explain evidence or testimony, subject to the court's Rule 107 balancing analysis and other applicable evidentiary requirements.
What is the difference between Rule 107 and Rule 1006?
Rule 107 covers non-evidentiary aids used for explanation. Rule 1006 allows qualifying summaries, charts, or calculations to be admitted as evidence when voluminous admissible writings, recordings, or photographs cannot be conveniently examined in court.
Does Rule 107 require advance disclosure of an illustrative aid?
Not by itself. The Advisory Committee left advance-notice requirements to trial judges, so counsel should review local rules, pretrial orders, standing orders, and case-specific rulings.
Can jurors take a Rule 107 aid into deliberations?
Generally no. The aid may accompany the jury only if all parties consent or the court orders otherwise for good cause.
For distinguishing an illustrative aid from substantive evidence, the purpose for which a visual is offered is more important than its format. The three categories differ in an important way:
Illustrative aid: Helps the factfinder understand evidence or argument but is not itself evidence. Rule 107 governs material used solely for this purpose.
Substantive demonstrative evidence: Demonstrative material offered to prove a disputed fact is substantive evidence if admitted and is governed by the rules applicable to evidence rather than Rule 107.
Rule 1006 summary: A qualifying summary, chart, or calculation may be admitted as evidence to prove the contents of voluminous admissible writings, recordings, or photographs that cannot be conveniently examined in court.
The Advisory Committee chose the term illustrative aid because "demonstrative evidence" had been used inconsistently. Rule 1006 also makes clear that a summary used only as an illustrative aid falls under Rule 107.
A calculation chart used only to explain testimony may therefore fall under Rule 107, while a qualifying chart offered to prove the contents of voluminous records may be admitted under Rule 1006.
Expert witness demonstratives may include diagrams, animations, financial charts, testing graphs, timelines, and computer simulations. Rule 107 can govern these materials when they are used solely to help explain evidence, including expert testimony, or argument.
Rule 107 does not make the expert's underlying opinion admissible. Federal Rule of Evidence 702 separately governs expert testimony. The witness must be qualified by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, and the proponent must demonstrate to the court, more likely than not, that Rule 702(a) through (d) are satisfied. An illustrative aid cannot substitute for those requirements.
Rule 703 may also matter when a demonstrative displays otherwise inadmissible facts or data of a type that experts in the particular field would reasonably rely on in forming an opinion on the subject. Placing that information in a slide, diagram, or animation does not independently authorize its disclosure to the jury. If the proponent seeks to disclose that information, its probative value in helping the jury evaluate the expert's opinion must substantially outweigh its prejudicial effect.
The Supreme Court adopted Federal Rule of Evidence 107 on April 2, 2024, authorized its transmission to Congress, and provided for an effective date of December 1, 2024.
The proposal was originally published as Rule 611(d). During rulemaking, the Advisory Committee removed a proposed general notice requirement and extended the rule to openings and closings. It also adopted the current "substantially outweighed" balancing standard, clarified that illustrative aids are not evidence, and relocated the provision to Rule 107.
In Williams v. Tregre, No. 23-1095 (E.D. La. June 11, 2025), the court applied Rule 107 to a video animation. It denied the motion to exclude without prejudice to trial objections and allowed the animation to be used with witnesses if the plaintiffs laid an appropriate foundation and made clear that it was an illustration rather than a recreation. The court barred its use during opening statement, admission as evidence, and use during deliberations.
In Keefe v. Britt's Bow Wow Boutique, Inc., Nos. 23-14024 & 24-11252 (11th Cir. May 23, 2025) (unpublished), the Eleventh Circuit discussed Rule 107 while reviewing a calculation chart used during closing argument. Because the trial predated Rule 107, Rule 611(a) governed. Considering both frameworks, the court found no abuse of discretion and observed that, based on the materials available for appellate review, the chart did not appear to introduce new evidence.
In United States v. Baskerville, 164 F.4th 459 (6th Cir. 2026), the Sixth Circuit noted in a footnote that Rule 107 now expressly addresses illustrative aids. The challenged phone charts, however, were admitted into evidence, and the Sixth Circuit analyzed them as "secondary-evidence summaries" under its precedent involving Rules 611 and 1006.
Attorneys and experts should first determine the purpose of the proposed visual. If it merely explains testimony or argument, Rule 107 may apply. If it is offered as proof, another evidentiary framework may control.
Before trial, counsel should also consider whether:
The visual accurately reflects the expert's testimony and underlying evidence.
Technical assumptions, measurements, timing, scale, and data inputs are clearly identifiable.
The presentation could make disputed assumptions appear more certain than the evidence supports.
The visual includes otherwise inadmissible material.
Local rules, standing orders, or pretrial orders require advance disclosure.
The record clearly identifies the visual as an illustrative aid rather than admitted evidence.
Is a Rule 107 illustrative aid evidence?
No. Rule 107 expressly states that an illustrative aid is not evidence. Its function is to help the factfinder understand evidence or argument.
Can an expert use an animation or computer simulation under Rule 107?
Yes, potentially. Animations and computer simulations can qualify as illustrative aids when used to explain evidence or testimony, subject to the court's Rule 107 balancing analysis and other applicable evidentiary requirements.
What is the difference between Rule 107 and Rule 1006?
Rule 107 covers non-evidentiary aids used for explanation. Rule 1006 allows qualifying summaries, charts, or calculations to be admitted as evidence when voluminous admissible writings, recordings, or photographs cannot be conveniently examined in court.
Does Rule 107 require advance disclosure of an illustrative aid?
Not by itself. The Advisory Committee left advance-notice requirements to trial judges, so counsel should review local rules, pretrial orders, standing orders, and case-specific rulings.
Can jurors take a Rule 107 aid into deliberations?
Generally no. The aid may accompany the jury only if all parties consent or the court orders otherwise for good cause.
Federal Rules of Evidence
Federal Rules of Evidence