The court was asked to consider whether a letter written by the appellant’s solicitor admitting the appellant had inflicted injury could be admitted as a previous inconsistent statement at the trial when he denied causing the injury.
Held: It had been admitted properly. The appellant’s solicitor was his agent and had ostensible authority to write a letter; no competent solicitor would have written such a letter without instructions to do so. The letter was therefore in principle admissible, subject to considerations under section 78.
Citations:
[2004] EWCA Crim 2844, [2005] 1 Cr App R 33
Statutes:
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 194 878
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Newell, Regina v CACD 30-Mar-2012
The appellant challenged the introduction in evidence of a previous inconsistent statement lodged on his behalf by counsel on a Plea and Case Management Form at a directions hearing.
Held: The appeal was allowed. An advocate plainly has . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Evidence
Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.452400
