Chinn, Regina v: CACD 15 Mar 2012

The defendant appealed against his conviction for a serious assault. He argued that the prosecution should not have been allowed to introduce parts of a witness’ statement where the witness could not remember the underlying events directly.
Held: The appeal failed. Aikens LJ said ‘in order to work out the precise scope of section 120(5) we think it is necessary to look more closely at its purpose. The previous statement of a witness will have identified or described a person, object or place that is connected with an alleged offence or other relevant event. A description of a person, object or place that is made in a vacuum is of no use in criminal proceedings. The description or identification has to be put in the relevant context because the person, or object or place is being described or identified for a particular purpose in the criminal proceedings. Thus the witness may say in the statement that it was Mr X who was at the ABC Bar on a certain day at a certain time. That statement identifies Mr X in this way because it is that identification at that place and time that is relevant; probably to an alleged offence at the ABC Bar at a particular time. The same must be true of an object and a place.
Thus, we conclude that section 120(4) and (5) can be used to admit parts of Ms I’s witness statement, but not the whole of it. The parts that describe the appellant and identify him as being the person who was in the nightclub and then threw a glass bottle that hit Ms D are, in our view, admissible under section 120(5). But other parts of the narrative in the witness statement that go beyond identifying or describing the appellant and the fact that it was him that threw the glass bottle, are not admissible under section 120(4) and (5).’

Aikens LJ, Field Cooke QC JJ
[2012] EWCA Crim 501, (2012) 176 JP 209, [2012] Crim LR 707, [2012] 2 Cr App R 4
Bailii
Against the Person Act 1861 20, Criminal Justice Act 1967 9, Criminal Justice Act 2003 120(4) 120(6) 139
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRegina v Virgo CACD 1978
The defendant appealed against his conviction for conspiracy and corrupt acceptance of bribes. One of the witnesses for the prosecution was a person engaged in pornography and who had allegedly bribed the defendant. The Court considered the . .
CitedRegina v Sekhon CACD 1987
A police officer witness kept an observation log based on his own observations and those of other police officers reporting to him. When retiring, the jury had requested access to the log which had been used by the officer to refresh his memory in . .
CitedPashmfouroush and Another, Regina v CACD 1-Sep-2006
Statements in an out of court witness statement were only put to the witness in cross-examination and the court was now asked whether the prosecution was entitled to re-examine on parts of the document not put to the witness in cross-examination. . .
CitedJones v Metcalfe QBD 1967
A witness saw a lorry involved in an incident and noted its registration number. He then gave the number to a policeman who had not seen the lorry.
Held: The evidence by the policeman of his note of the lorry’s number plate was inadmissible . .
CitedJones v Metcalfe QBD 1967
A witness saw a lorry involved in an incident and noted its registration number. He then gave the number to a policeman who had not seen the lorry.
Held: The evidence by the policeman of his note of the lorry’s number plate was inadmissible . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.452138