(Jamaica) The defendants appealed the dismissal of their appeals against convictions for capital murder. In Scott, a special constable was shot with his own revolver in a bar, and subsequently died of his wounds. The only evidence identifying Scott and his co-accused, Walters, was contained in the deposition of a witness who had died before trial. In Barnes and others the deceased was shot after stopping his van and his money was stolen. Three defendants were charged with his murder. The only evidence identifying them was given by a witness, who gave evidence at the preliminary inquiry, but who was murdered before the trial. In each case, the evidence of the missing witness was read as his evidence.
Held: Lord Griffiths summarised the common law. He underlined the discretion of the judge to exclude such evidence, but pointed out: ‘ If the courts are too ready to exclude the deposition of a deceased witness it may well place the lives of witnesses at risk particularly in a case where only one witness has been courageous enough to give evidence against the accused or only one witness has had the opportunity to identify the accused’. A number of precautions could be taken: ‘no rules can usefully be laid down to control the detail to which a judge should descend in the individual case . . . This much however can be said that neither the inability to cross examine, nor the fact that the deposition contains the only evidence against the accused, nor the fact that identification evidence will of itself be sufficient to justify the exercise of the discretion.’
Judges:
Lord Griffiths
Citations:
(1989) 89 CAR 153
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Davis (Iain); Regina v Ellis, Regina v Gregory, Regina v Simms, Regina v Martin CACD 19-May-2006
The several defendants complained at the use at their trials of evidence given anonymously. The perceived need for anonymity arose because, from intimidation, the witnesses would not be willing to give their evidence without it.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Commonwealth, Criminal Practice
Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.242457