Evidence - cases - secondary list Flashcards
R v Williams
Competence – 10 year old illiterate boy who understood need to tell truth permitted
R v Williams
Competence – 8 year old boy who did not know address or name of teacher refused
R v Drover
Competence – Young girl with all the qualities of an actress refused
Woolmington v DPP
Criminal – beyond reasonable doubt.
Prosecution must exclude rational hypotheses consistent with innocence (but not hypotheses which are not reasonably capable of being inferred from the evidence).
Chamberlain
Distinguish special circumstances where ‘intermediate fact’ or ‘primary fact’ (e.g. analogy: strands of a rope vs. links in a chain)
King v Bryant
Refreshing memory – 1. If successful, all admissible. 2. If unsuccessful, document must be produced if asked for by opponent’s counsel and can then be admitted as evidence of its truth. 3. Witness may recite a document they ‘learnt off by heart’ unless opponent objects (because witness is giving hearsay evidence), provided document can be produced
R v Hayden and Slattery
Hostile witness: someone who is ‘unwilling to tell the truth for the advancement of justice’
R v Chin
Cross-examination poses a particular problem in criminal trials where prosecution wants to rebut a denial by an accused (because the prosecution usually cannot offer new evidence after they have closed their case).
AG v Hitchcock
The test for the Finality Rule: if the witness’ answer is a matter you would be allowed, on your own part, to prove (i.e. if it has such a connection with the issues that you would be allowed to give it in evidence) then you may contradict the witness
Soma; Cheney vs Shaw
If prosecution could have led rebuttal evidence during evidence in chief (i.e. it was reasonably foreseeable that the issue may have arisen), then that evidence will not be allowed: Soma; Cheney. However, if prosecution could not reasonably foresee the issue, evidence can be called to rebut: Shaw.
R v Davidson
Where obtained via sting operations, confessions usually entirely voluntary (i.e. unforced). Nothing discreditable in recording confessions. Police not required to warn that things said might be recorded/used in evidence.
R v Hytch
Victim told friends she had arranged to meet with Hytch and pretend she was pregnant to try to extort money. Was last seen alive near where she told friends she would meet him. Evidence admissible to show she had actually set off to keep that appointment (i.e. intention > truth).
R v Thompson
Statements given in sworn evidence in previous proceedings between the same parties are admissible in later proceedings between then relating to substantially similar issues when the witness is unable to attend because of some good reason such as death, serious illness or absence abroad.
Myers v DPP
Engine numbers inadmissible hearsay leading to acquittal in car theft prosecution. Section 93 implemented as a direct response.
Duke v Duke
Identifying handwriting of deceased relative
