Links: Home | swarblaw - law discussions

swarb.co.uk - law index


These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.  














Criminal Evidence - From: 1849 To: 1899

This page lists 13 cases, and was prepared on 21 May 2019.


 
 Regina v William Baldry; 1852 - (1852) 2 Den CC Res 430; (1852) 2 Den CC 430; [1852] EngR 63; (1852) 2 Den 430; (1852) 169 ER 568
 
Regina v Bernard [1858] EngR 554; (1858) 1 F and F 240; (1858) 175 ER 709
17 Apr 1858
CCC
Lord Campbell CJ, Pollock CB, Erle J, Crowder J
Criminal Evidence
Evidence that A was privy to a plot to murder B by explosive machines, held sufficient to go to the jury on counts charging A with murder of C (accidentally killed by the explosion) - wth conspiring to murder him, and as an accessory to the murder.
[ Commonlii ]
 
Regina v Birmingham Overseers (1861) 1 B and S 763
1861

Cockburn CJ
Criminal Evidence
Cockburn CJ: "People were formerly frightened out of their wits about admitting evidence, lest juries should go wrong. In modern times we admit the evidence, and discuss its weight."
1 Citers



 
 Regina v Welsh; 1862 - [1862] EngR 187 (A); (1862) 3 F and F 276
 
Regina v Cheverton [1862] EngR 142; (1862) 2 F and F 833; (1862) 175 ER 1308
1862


Criminal Evidence
Although it is necessary, in a case of murder, that there should be evldence that the body found 1s the body of the murdered person, the circumstances may he sufficient evidence of identity. Admissions by the prisoner, elicited by questions of a police officer, with an admonition to tell all she knew, &c., held inadmlssible. But a subsequent statement by the prisoner to another police officer is not necessarily so far under the same influence as to exclude it (a)).
[ Commonlii ]

 
 Regina v Tolson; 1864 - [1864] EngR 73 (A); (1864) 4 F and F 104
 
Regina v Riley And Another [1866] EngR 33; (1866) 4 F and F 964; (1866) 176 ER 868
1866


Criminal Evidence

[ Commonlii ]
 
Charfield And Wife v Comerford [1866] EngR 4 (A); (1866) 4 F and F 1003
1866


Criminal Evidence

[ Commonlii ]

 
 Regina v Bedingfield; 1879 - (1879) 14 Cox CC 341
 
Regina v Gibson (1887) 18 QBD 537
1887

Lord Coleridge CJ
Criminal Evidence
Evidence had been wrongly admitted. Lord Coleridge CJ said: "It is clear that a verdict so obtained in a civil case would not formerly have been allowed to stand, because until the passing of the Judicature Acts the rule was that if any bit of evidence not legally admissible, which might have affected the verdict, had gone to the jury, the party against whom it was given was entitled to a new trial, because the Courts said that they would not weigh evidence. Where, therefore, such evidence had gone to the jury a new trial was granted as a matter of right."
Irrespective of whether counsel objects to the admission of certain evidence, it has been said that there is an overall duty on the trial judge to ensure that only legally admissible evidence goes in to the record of the trial
1 Citers


 
Regina v Coll (1889) 25 LR Ir 522
1889

Holmes J
Criminal Evidence
"The evidence of a witness cannot be corroborated by proving statements to the same effect previously made by him; nor will the fact that his testimony is impeached in cross-examination render such evidence admissible. Even if the impeachment takes the form of showing a contradiction or inconsistency between the evidence given at the trial and something said by the witness on a former occasion."
1 Citers


 
Regina v Mitchell (1892) 17 Cox CC 503
1892

Cave J
Criminal Evidence
The court gave the following direction to the jury as to the way in which they should treat the response of the accused to an accusation made in his presence: "Now the whole admissibility of statements of this kind rests upon the consideration that if a charge is made against a person in that person's presence, it is reasonable to expect that he or she will immediately deny it, and that the absence of such a denial is some evidence of an admission on the part of the person charged, and of the truth of the charge. Undoubtedly when persons are speaking on equal terms and a charge is made, and a person says nothing, and expresses no indignation and does nothing to repel the charge, that is some evidence to show that he admits the charge to be true."
1 Citers


 
Regina v Miller (1898) 18 Cox 54)
1898

Hawkins, J
Criminal Practice, Criminal Evidence
The court allowed the accused’s answers to be proved against him, when he had been cross-examined before arrest: "Every case must be decided according to the whole of its circumstances"

 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.