The printout from a computerised machine was used to monitor telephone calls. It automatically recorded information such as the numbers to which the calls were made and the duration of the calls. This was admitted as real evidence. It was held that where information is recorded by mechanical means without the intervention of human mind the record made by the machine is admissible, and was not hearsay.
Citations:
(1990) 91 Cr App R 186 CA
Cited by:
Disapproved – Regina v Shephard HL 16-Dec-1992
The defendant had been convicted of theft from a supermarket. The evidence was that the till rolls did not include the goods the subject of the charge. She argued that it should not have been admitted as evidence, without supporting evidence that . .
Cited – Regina (O) v Coventry Magistrates Court QBD 5-Apr-2004
The defendant was charged with incitement to distribute indecent images of children. He complained that the evidence relied upon were print-outs of pages on a web-site, being hearsay, and inadmissible as evidence not merely of the computer but of a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Evidence
Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.183039
