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 1984 Act, he did adopt the course of testing the section 78 issue by an examination of the section 114(2) factors and he resolved that it was in the interests of justice that the evidence should be received. The court restated the factors in this case concluding that the evidence had been correctly admitted.
Judges:
Pitchford LJ, Cranston, Haddon-Cave JJ
Citations:
[2013] EWCA Crim 41
Links:
Statutes:
Criminal Procedure Act 1865 3, Criminal Justice Act 2003 119(1), Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 78, European Convention on Human Rights 6
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Thompson CACD 1976
A witness’s refusal to answer questions may be sufficient to demonstrate hostility and to trigger the right to cross-examine, including upon previous statements made by the witness. . .
Cited – Regina v Seton CACD 12-Mar-2010
The defendant had been charged with murder. He served a late defence statement blaming the murder on a man called P who was already serving a sentence of life imprisonment for murder. P refused to respond to police enquiries of him, but in telephone . .
Cited – Doorson v The Netherlands ECHR 26-Mar-1996
Evidence was given in criminal trials by anonymous witnesses and evidence was also read as a result of a witness having appeared at the trial but then absconded. The defendant was convicted of drug trafficking. As regards the anonymous witnesses, . .
Cited – Horncastle and Others, Regina v SC 9-Dec-2009
Each defendant said they had not received a fair trial in that the court had admitted written evidence of a witness he had not been allowed to challenge. The witnesses had been victims, two of whom had died before trial. It was suggested that the . .
Cited – Regina v Z CACD 23-Jan-2009
The defendant appealed against convictions for rape and indecent assault under the 1956 Act. The allegations dated from 1985 to 1989 when the complainant had been between 9 and 13. The prosecution brought in a doctor who said that in 1993 D . .
Cited – Ibrahim, Regina v CACD 27-Apr-2012
The appellant challenged the admissibility of witness statements made by the complainant where the complainant had died before the trial.
Held: The ‘counterbalancing measures’ in the 2003 Act and at the common law had not been properly . .
Cited – Al-Khawaja v The United Kingdom; Tahery v The United Kingdom ECHR 15-Dec-2011
(Grand Chamber) The claimants complained of the use against them of hearsay evidence in their trials.
Held: ‘the underlying principle is that the defendant in a criminal trial should have an effective opportunity to challenge the evidence . .
Cited – Luca v Italy ECHR 27-Feb-2001
The accused had been convicted. After exercising his right to silence, there were read to the court accounts of statements made by co-accused but without an opportunity for him to cross examine the witnesses.
Held: Saunders had established the . .
Cited – Regina v Davis HL 18-Jun-2008
The defendant had been tried for the murder of two men by shooting them at a party. He was identified as the murderer by three witnesses who had been permitted to give evidence anonymously, from behind screens, because they had refused, out of fear, . .
Cited – Regina v Riat and Others CACD 11-Jul-2012
Five defendants appealed against their convictions after the admission of hearsay evidence.
Held: The court re-iterated that the importance of the hearsay evidence to the case remained a vital consideration when deciding upon its . .
Cited – Regina v Turnbull and Another etc CCA 9-Jun-1976
The defendants appealed against their convictions which had been based upon evidence of visual identification.
Held: Identification evidence can be unreliable, and courts must take steps to reduce injustice. The judge should warn the jury of . .
Cited – Regina v Peters, Palmer, Campbell CACD 10-Mar-2005
In each case a young person had been convicted on a guilty plea of murder. The court considered the affect on sentence of the defendant’s age and maturity.
Held: A difference of a few months might make an arbitrary difference in the minimum . .
Cited – Regina v Taylor CACD 4-Apr-2008
Appeal against sentence of life with a minimum term of 15 years for murder. . .
Cited – Martin v Regina CACD 6-Jul-2010
The defendant had been a passenger on a car driven by a learner driver. The car crashed killing the driver and seriously injuring another. He appealed against his conviction for aiding and abetting dangerous driving.
Held: The appeal . .
Cited – Regina v Fagan CACD 7-Sep-2012
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Evidence, Human Rights
Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.470807
