FRE 107 Illustrative Aids: Rule, Limits, and Trial Implications

What FRE 107 Covers

Federal Rule of Evidence 107 provides a federal framework for illustrative aids: presentations offered not as evidence, but to help the trier of fact understand evidence or argument. Effective December 1, 2024, the rule addresses when a court may permit an aid, whether it may accompany the jury during deliberations, and how it should be preserved in the trial record.

Under Rule 107(a), a court may allow an illustrative aid when its utility in assisting comprehension is not substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, or wasting time. The rule applies to aids used at any point during trial, including opening statements, witness examinations, and closing argument.

Rule 107 does not itself make an illustrative aid substantive evidence. The distinction matters because an aid can be useful and still require close court supervision. A court may prohibit or require modification of a visual that distorts the evidence, adds unsupported factual propositions, oversimplifies a disputed issue, or risks being treated as proof rather than explanation.

The rule applies in federal court. State evidentiary rules, local practice, standing orders, and judge-specific procedures may differ.

What Counts as an Illustrative Aid?

Classification turns on the material's purpose and proposed use, not on its format or label. An illustrative aid is intended to help the factfinder follow testimony, admitted evidence, or counsel's argument. Drawings, photographs, diagrams, timelines, charts, graphs, animations, video depictions, and computer simulations can all serve that explanatory role.

For broader terminology and examples, see our guide to demonstrative evidence in court. Courts have used the phrase "demonstrative evidence" in different ways, which is one reason Rule 107 uses the narrower term "illustrative aid." The 2024 Committee Note explains that demonstrative evidence can refer to substantive evidence offered to prove a disputed fact by demonstration.

A visual offered to establish that an event occurred, prove a factual proposition, or otherwise serve as substantive proof is not governed simply by calling it illustrative. It remains subject to the evidentiary rules applicable to that proof, including appropriate foundation and other admissibility requirements.

This issue often arises with expert testimony. A medical timeline may organize treatment records, an anatomy diagram may orient the jury, and a technical chart may help explain an expert's methodology. Similarly, physical presentations such as 3D-printed courtroom models require attention to purpose, foundation, accuracy, and classification. The visual should remain tied to what the witness can properly explain and to the evidence or argument it is intended to clarify. A polished presentation cannot replace admissible proof or a reliable expert opinion.

Illustrative Aids, Demonstrative Evidence, and Rule 1006 Summaries

Rule 107 and Rule 1006 serve different functions. Rule 107(d) provides that a summary, chart, or calculation admitted as evidence to prove the content of voluminous admissible evidence is governed by Rule 1006, not Rule 107.

Rule 1006 permits a party to use a summary, chart, or calculation to prove the content of voluminous writings, recordings, or photographs that cannot conveniently be examined in court. The underlying materials must be made available for examination or copying, or both, by other parties at a reasonable time and place. Whether those materials qualify, whether the summary is substantive evidence, and whether Rule 1006's requirements are met are separate questions from whether a visual may be used as an illustrative aid.

• Illustrative aid: Function: Helps explain evidence or argument; Offered to prove contents?: No; Trial-use issue: Court assesses usefulness and potential prejudice; Further guidance: FRE 107
• Substantive exhibit: Function: Proves a disputed fact; Offered to prove contents?: Yes; Trial-use issue: Must satisfy applicable admissibility requirements; Further guidance: Applicable evidence rules
• Rule 1006 summary: Function: Proves contents of voluminous qualifying materials; Offered to prove contents?: Yes; Trial-use issue: Underlying materials must be available to other parties; Further guidance: Rule 1006

Classification can affect foundation, disclosure expectations, record treatment, and whether a jury may use the material during deliberations. For a more detailed comparison, see FRE 107 vs. Rule 1006.

Jury Deliberations and Record Treatment

An illustrative aid is not evidence and generally must not be provided to the jury during deliberations. Rule 107 permits jury access only when all parties consent or the court, for good cause, orders otherwise.

If the court permits an illustrative aid to go to the jury during deliberations, it must give a limiting instruction upon request. The instruction must explain that the aid is not evidence and cannot be considered proof of any fact. This limitation reflects the aid's explanatory role: it is ordinarily used alongside testimony or argument, not independently as proof.

Rule 107 also provides that, when practicable, an illustrative aid used at trial must be entered into the record. Trial teams should preserve the actual version shown in court, particularly where a presentation, animation, or digital display changes during trial. Record treatment may be consequential in post-trial proceedings, so counsel should address how the court expects materials to be marked, retained, and reflected in the record.

These provisions do not establish a universal rule for every exhibit used in court. Whether a particular item is evidence, an illustrative aid, or something else remains a case-specific question.

Disclosure, Objections, and Trial Preparation

Rule 107 does not impose a categorical nationwide advance-disclosure requirement for illustrative aids. The Committee Note leaves trial judges to determine whether, when, and how advance notice should be required. That determination may depend on the aid's complexity, the risk of surprise, the timing of its intended use, and whether disclosure would reveal planned witness examination or argument.

Before trial, counsel should review applicable local rules, standing orders, scheduling orders, pretrial orders, and the presiding judge's procedures. Those sources may require exhibit exchanges, identification of demonstratives, meet-and-confer efforts, technology testing, or advance resolution of objections.

A practical review should address:

• Purpose: Is the visual explanatory only, or is it offered to prove a disputed fact?
• Support and accuracy: Can the sponsoring witness identify the testimony, data, assumptions, or evidence represented in the aid?
• Potential objections: Could the aid mislead, confuse issues, create unfair prejudice, or extend beyond the admitted record?
• Disclosure: Does an order or local procedure require advance exchange, notice, or a pretrial ruling?
• Deliberations and record preservation: Is there consent or a good-cause basis for jury access, and has the final trial version been retained?

Teams should also confirm that courtroom technology will display the material as intended. Last-minute revisions may be necessary as testimony develops, but they can affect disclosure, objections, and preservation of the appellate record. For workflow and logistics considerations, see our guide to expert witness exhibit preparation.

How Rule 107 Developed

Rule 107 followed an earlier proposal to add a new Rule 611(d) addressing illustrative aids. The 2022 proposal included provisions concerning permitted use, notice and objections, jury deliberations, and treatment of aids in the record. It was not adopted as part of Rule 611.

The 2024 amendments instead added Rule 107 in Article I of the Federal Rules of Evidence. Unlike the former proposal, Rule 107 does not establish a uniform advance-notice requirement. The Committee Note recognizes competing concerns: complex aids may warrant meaningful review by the opposing party, while mandatory early disclosure can reveal planned examination or argument.

During the proposal-stage debate, attorneys also raised concerns about preserving flexibility to revise visual presentations as a trial unfolds. Ryan Babcock, a Georgia personal injury attorney, described editing presentations during trial and using a flip chart to capture key phrases from expert testimony. Those concerns remain relevant when courts develop case-specific procedures, but they do not excuse compliance with a court's disclosure requirements or pretrial orders.

Rule 107 gives federal courts a direct framework for evaluating illustrative aids. Effective use still depends on accurate preparation, careful classification, and prompt attention to the procedures governing the particular case.