This admission constitutes direct evidence. People v. Panus (1979), 76 Ill.2d 263; People v. Vella (1985), 133 Ill. App.3d 104. Defendant asserts that Lageotakes' testimony is unworthy of rational belief and is not corroborated by the other evidence.
In any event, we do not find the admission of this evidence to be erroneous. Evidence is relevant where it tends to prove a disputed fact or render a matter in question more or less probable. ( People v. Vella (1985), 133 Ill. App.3d 104, 478 N.E.2d 593.) Relevant evidence is admissible where it fairly tends to prove the offense charged. ( People v. Daniels (1987), 164 Ill. App.3d 1055, 518 N.E.2d 669.)
( People v. Clark (1987), 160 Ill. App.3d 877, 888-89; People v. Veal (1986), 149 Ill. App.3d 619.) Evidence is relevant when it tends to prove a disputed fact or to render the matter in issue more or less probable in light of logic, experience and accepted assumptions of human behavior. People v. Vella (1985), 133 Ill. App.3d 104. • 8, 9 Although the court and the People are under a duty to avoid the introduction of evidence the prejudicial effect which outweighs its relevance ( People v. Jones (1982), 94 Ill.2d 275), relevant, admissible evidence need not be excluded simply because it tends to prejudice the accused; the trial court must weigh the relevance of the evidence against its prejudicial effect on the defendant.