Unfavourable Witnesses Flashcards

1
Q

What is the prosecutions positive responsibility? First fundamental proposition.

A

To call all available evidence, both inculpatory and exculpatory.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What is the second fundamental proposition?

A

All evidence should be properly tested.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Case law in relation to calling all witnesses?

A

R v Whitehorn

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What does R v Whitehorn say?

A

All witnesses who’s evidence is necessary to unfold the narrative should be called. If they aren’t called, the prosecution should proffer a satisfactory explanation as to why.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Under what circumstances do we not need to call a witness and what case law?

A

R v Whitehorn.
Don’t need to call witness if Unreliable, untrustworthy, incapable of belief, unnecessarily repetitious (multiple police for same evidence).

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What do we base our decision on whether to call a witness or not? Case Law?

A

R v Apostilides
Judgement of prosecutor, own observations, more than a suspicion, should CONFERENCE witness, can’t rely on what been told by others.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What can result if don’t call a witness?

A

Miscarriage of justice

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Case law in relation to drawing inference if witness not called?

A

Jones v Dunkel

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What is Jones v Dunkel?

A

If you don’t call a witness the court, and can’t satisfactorily account for them, Court can draw an inference that the uncalled witness would not have assisted the case of the party who were expected to call them.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What case law has trumped Jones v Dunkel?

A

Mahmood v Western Australia

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What is Mahmood v Western Australia?

A

Not calling a witness doesn’t automatically allow court to draw an inference, it must look at all of the circumstances of the case first.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

S 38 of the evidence Act?

A

Unfavourable Witnesses

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

S38 1?

A

(1) A party who called a witness may, with the leave of the court, question the witness, as though the party were cross-examining the witness, about:

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

S 38 1 a?

A

Evidence given that is unfavourable

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

S38 1 b?

A

Witness not giving a genuine attempt to give evidence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

S38 1 c?

A

Prior inconsistent statement by the witness

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

S38 (6)?

A

The court is to take into account when determining to give leave;

  • a) Whether the party gave notice of the unfavourable witness at the earliest chance. (as soon as you become aware)
    b) The matters or extent the witness has been, or is likely to be, questioned by other party (defence are likely to cross examine them if prosecution doesn’t)
18
Q

What section do we seek leave under?

A

S 192 Evidence Act

19
Q

What does 192 say?

A

Court may give leave, or permissions, as it sees fit.

20
Q

192 (2)?

A

Court may take into consideration when determining;

a) Extent to which likely to add unduly to or shorten length of hearing.
b) Extent to which it would be unfair to a party or witness
c) Importance of the evidence
d) Nature of the proceedings
e) Power to adjourn or make another order

21
Q

S 38 (3)?

A

Separate leave is required to cross-examine the witness about matters of credit.

22
Q

What does R v Apostilidies tell us in relation to suspicion?

A

It will not be enough that the prosecutor merely had a suspicion about the unreliability of the evidence.

23
Q

What does Lozano tell us?

A

Even neutral evidence may satisfy the meaning of unfavourable.

24
Q

S32?

A

Attempts to revive memory in court.

25
Q

32 (1)?

A

Witness must not use document to revive memory unless granted leave by court.

26
Q

32 (2)?

A

(2) Without limiting the matters that the court may take into account in deciding whether to give leave, it is to take into account:
(a) whether the witness will be able to recall the fact or opinion adequately without using the document, and
(b) whether so much of the document as the witness proposes to use is, or is a copy of, a document that:
(i) was written or made by the witness when the events recorded in it were fresh in his or her memory, or
(ii) was, at such a time, found by the witness to be accurate.

27
Q

32 (3)?

A

Ability to read aloud the document the parts that relate.

28
Q

32(4)?

A

Court is to give direction for document to be produced to witness for the purpose of this section.

29
Q

Lozano and GAC on demeanour?

A

Court can take into account the demanour of the witness.

30
Q

S 43?

A

Prior inconsistent statements

31
Q

43 1?

A

Witness may be questioned in relation to a prior inconsistent statement whether or not

a) Complete particulars of statement have been given to witness
b) Document containing record of statement has been show to witness.

32
Q

43 2?

A

If they dont admit to making statement, before x examine;

a) inform them of enough of the circumstances of document so they can identify it
b) draw their attention to enough of their statement that is inconsistent with their evidence.

If they dont agree with the making of the statement you have to make sure there is no misunderstanding about which document you are referring to.

33
Q

43 3?

A

for purpose of adducing evidence, party may re open case.

34
Q

Burrell v R?

A

Leave can be granted for the cross examination of certain witnesses after defence had cross-examined those witness if inconsistencies arise during defence cross. Application to be made at end of defence cross

35
Q

Can you hand up statement for s 38 application?

A

yes

36
Q

What do you rely on s 60 to do?

A

Tender the statement in the case proper after a successful unfavourable witness application.

37
Q

Adam v The Queen?

A

Held that evidence of prior inconsistent statement no longer had to show only that the witness is unreliable but also to show evidence of their truth.
S 60 means what it says. If the evidence is in due to credit, then it can be used for any other purpose.

38
Q

Lozano definition of unfavourable?

A

Not favourable.

39
Q

S 60?

A

If evidence is admitted under S 60 for a non-hearsay purpose i.e Credit, then it can be used for any other purpose. i.e Evidence of the truth of the facts asserted.

40
Q

Col v R?

A

Once statements admissible for non hearsay purpose, S 60 converts them to evidence of the facts.

41
Q

Once unfavourable witness, what matters can you cross examaine on?

A

Only matters relating to the section you sought leave under.

42
Q

S42?

A

Court may disallow leading questions.

Provides controls in relation to the way an unfavourable witness is examined by the party that did not call the witness.