Charles Rogers is accused of robbing a bank by breaking into the bank's vault after hours. The prosecution seeks to introduce evidence that a blowtorch was found in his garage. The defendant objects, pointing out that Rogers' brother, who shares the home with Rogers, is a professional pipe-fitter and uses the blowtorch every day for legitimate work. The evidence is:

A.Relevant, but only if the crime that was committed involved the use of a blowtorch.

Explanation:

These are options for the question

A.Relevant, but only if the crime that was committed involved the use of a blowtorch.

B.Relevant, but only if the prosecution can prove that Charles Rogers and not his brother was the actual owner of the blowtorch.

C.Irrelevant, assuming the defendant can prove to the court in an offer of proof that his brother does in fact use the blowtorch for professional purposes.

D.Irrelevant, since it is not information that a person would want to know in deciding whether the defendant committed the crime.

From the question we are informed Charles Rogers who was accused of robbing a bank by breaking into the bank's vault after hours. The prosecution seeks to introduce evidence that a blowtorch was found in his garage. The defendant objects, pointing out that Rogers' brother, who shares the home with Rogers, is a professional pipe-fitter and uses the blowtorch every day for legitimate work. In this case The evidence is relevant, but only if the crime that was committed involved the use of a blowtorch. In a crime scene which is regarded as location that is been associated to the crime committed. In this scene physical evidence should be able to be provided so that investigation and persecution of those involving in the crime can be relevant and it will be easier for investigators as well as law enforcement

idk