Article 32 hearings explicitly operate without formal evidence rules, permitting broad information consideration regardless of technical admissibility at trial. Military Rules of Evidence don’t apply except for privileges, allowing hearsay, character evidence, and uncharged misconduct exploration. This flexibility serves the investigative purpose enabling comprehensive case evaluation unconstrained by trial limitations.
Relaxed standards permit sworn statements instead of live testimony, investigative reports as evidence summaries, and expert opinions without formal qualification. Chain of custody requirements receive minimal emphasis. Authentication procedures focus on basic reliability rather than technical compliance. Opinion testimony from investigators about case conclusions faces no prohibition.
Privileges remain protected including attorney-client, spousal, and classified information requiring appropriate handling. Self-incrimination protections apply fully. Rape shield provisions under MRE 412 receive inconsistent application, with some PHOs conducting careful balancing while others permit broader inquiry given investigative purposes.
Strategic implications include government presenting evidence inadmissible at trial to establish probable cause while defense explores excluded evidence revealing case weaknesses. The informal approach sometimes reveals evidence problems requiring correction before trial. PHOs exercise discretion ensuring basic reliability while avoiding technical exclusions obscuring truth-seeking. The distinction from trial formality enables meaningful preliminary investigation serving screening and discovery functions.