(Hong Kong) The defendant appealed from his conviction for murder. He complained as to the adequacy of the judge’s directions to the jury.
Held: On a voir dire as to the admissibility of a defendant’s challenged statement, the prosecution should not ask questions in cross-examination of the defendant with the object of establishing the truth of the statement. When a statement is ruled inadmissible as contrary to the common law rule, evidence of what was said during the voir dire is inadmissible. Counsel for the defendant must have the opportunity to air the circumstances around the making of the statement before the jury.
Judges:
Hodson, Pearce, Pearson LL
Citations:
[1967] 2 AC 160, [1966] UKPC 25, (1967) 51 Cr App R 257, [1967] 1 All ER 948, [1967] 2 WLR 552, (1967) 51 Cr App Rep 257
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Mushtaq HL 21-Apr-2005
The defendant was convicted of fraud charges. He sought to have excluded statements made in interview on the basis that they had been obtained by oppressive behaviour by the police. His wife was very seriously ill in hospital and he had made the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Evidence
Updated: 20 September 2022; Ref: scu.445111