The court described the workings of the Act, saying that once the whole of the deposition is before the jury: ‘it will appear how far the suggested contradiction exists, and the absence of a particular statement may be explained by the context; or even if there is a discrepancy on the point, it may appear … Continue reading Regina v Riley: 1866
The admissibility of a handwriting comparison depended upon the control sample being ‘proved to the satisfaction of the judge to be genuine’. Held: This meant that the judge had to apply the criminal standard of proof to the question. Citations: [1983] 2 All ER 645, [1983] 3 WLR 1, [1983] QB 1039 Statutes: Criminal Procedure … Continue reading Regina v Ewing: CA 1983
The appellant was committed under 1881 Act to await his return to Ghana to face trial on corruption charges. He applied for a writ of habeas corpus contending inter alia that it would be unjust and oppressive to return him since he would be liable to be tried under the provisions of the Corrupt Practices … Continue reading Armah v Government of Ghana and Another: HL 1968
witness declining to answer questions – judge allowing request for him to be treated as hostile. . .
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
A photocopy of a cheque had been taken. The cheque itself was subsequently stolen. An expert gave evidence on the authenticity of the signature without having seen the original. It was held that statutory provisions were wide enough to allow the judge to give the photocopy the same status as the original for this purpose. … Continue reading Lockheed-Arabia v Owen: CA 7 Jul 1993
Handwriting experts may refer to a photocopy even though the original is lost. Citations: Ind Summary 03-May-1993 Statutes: Criminal Procedure Act 1865 8 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Litigation Practice Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.83147
The defendants appealed against their convictions for murder saying that the court should not have relied upon hearsay evidence. A witness had refused to give evidence, but his earlier evidnece was used. Held: The appeals failed. The judge had acted properly in that when considering the exercise of his judgment under section 78 of the … Continue reading Adeojo and Another v Regina: CACD 6 Feb 2013
The prosecutor invited the jury to convict contrary to the evidence of his own witness. The Crown had called a witness to establish a crucial fact, as it saw it, that the knife used in the killing on the ground floor had been kept upstairs and therefore must have been taken by the defendant in … Continue reading Regina v Pacey: CACD 3 Mar 1994
The defendant appealed his conviction, sayig that a witness having turned hostile, the judge should have more clearly warned the jury about the value of his evidence. Held: The appeal failed, though the judge should have given a stronger warning. The exact direction to be given will vary according to the circumstances of the particular … Continue reading Regina v Greene: CACD 6 Aug 2009
The defendant appealed an award of damages in favour of the applicant for assault by police officers whilst held in police custody. The said the judge should have allowed the claimant’s criminal record in in full. Held: The judge had directed the jury correctly. However as to damages, the award of exemplary damages was exessive, … Continue reading Watson v Cleveland Police: CA 12 Oct 2001
The claimant had been convicted of murder and his appeal had failed. He now sought disclosure of the forensic material held by the police to his own legal team. Held: Permission to apply for review was granted, but the claim failed. ‘It is necessary to show something that materially may cast doubt upon the safety … Continue reading Nunn v Suffolk Constabulary and Another: Admn 4 May 2012
(Ceylon) The appellants had been convicted of grave criminal offences under laws of the Parliament of Ceylon. The Act under which they were convicted was passed after an abortive coup, and deprived the appellants retrospectively of their right to . .
