This is an extract of our Evidence document, which we sell as part of our Advanced Criminal Litigation Notes collection written by the top tier of Cambridge And Oxilp And College Of Law students.
The following is a more accessble plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our Advanced Criminal Litigation Notes. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting:
Advanced Criminal Litigation Law of Evidence Hearsay:
? Statement not made in oral evidence relied on as evidence of a matter stated within it s121(2)
? Statement = any representation of fact or opinion made by any person s115(2)
? s115(3) Purpose of the person making the statement appears to court to have been to (a) make another person believe the statement
? Hearsay generally no, but will be allowed if D's right sufficiently protected.
? CrimPR 34 Must serve other side with notice of intention to rely on hearsay which is multiple hearsay, absent witness and interests of justice o 28 days Mags, 14 days Crown after D pleads NG (CrimPR 34.2(3)) o If D opposes, send notice of this within 14 days after service of notice. (CrimPR 34.2(2)(C))
? Multiple hearsay = hearsay statement used to prove another hearsay statement s121. Admissible if business document, in/consistent statement or interest of justice
? Application to exclude hearsay evidence Exceptions: Admissible if under Act s114(1)(a)
? Res Gestae s118(1) o So close in time and space so considered part of the event
? Confessions (s76(1) PACE) o Statement wholly or partially adverse to the person who made it whether made to a person in authority or not or whether in words or not (s82(1) PACE) o Only admissible against the maker for truth of its contents s76(1) o Exclusion of:
? Obtained by oppression s76(2)(a)
? s76(8) oppression = torture, inhuman or degrading treatment, use of threats of violence.
? R v Fulling  oppression = exercise of power or authority in a burdensome, harsh, wrongful manner, unjust or cruel treatment
? R v Davison  unlawful detention, unlawful refusal of legal advice, questioning about offence not arrested for.
? Obtained in circumstances making it unreliable s76(2)(b)
? Breach of PACE
? R v Trussler (18 hour detention, no rest)
? R v Alladice no legal advice but knew the law and his rights
? Adverse impact on fairness s78
? Only where breach of PACE or Codes are both significant and substantial R v Walsh (1989)
If D denies making the confession. Failure to make accurate record (Code C 11.7) failure to allow D to review his comments (Code C 11.11) failure to put confession made outside police station to D at start of interview (Code C 11.4) R v Canale 
Pre trial confession of a co-defendant usually only admissible against the maker, not the other co-defendant, there are exceptions though R v Y 
Where 2 co-defendants pleading NG 1 can adduce a confession of the other s76A(1), R v Johnson 
? Exclude s76A(2) balance of probabilities it was not obtained through oppression, unreliable circumstancess114(1)(d) Interest of justice o (2) considerations a) Probative value b) Other evidence on the matter c) Importance in context of the case d) Circumstances in which made e) Reliability of maker f) Reliability of statement g) Can oral evidence be given?
h) Difficulty in challenging i) Prejudicial impacts
? s116 Unavailable witness Must be first hand hearsay, NOT inadmissible, show court maker exists and is not made up o Dead o Unfit (mental/physical condition) o Untraceable and all reasonable steps taken o Outside of UK and not practicable to bring back o Fear (but limited s116(4))
? Risk of unfairness as no XX
? s117 business documents o s117(2) Created/received by a person in the course of business o Person supplying it has personal knowledge o Each person receiving thereafter in the course of business o Not admissible if reliability in doubt s117(7) Documents fine if produced by a machine not a person s115(2). Must be shown that the machine was working correctly though s129(1) Experts report admissible in evidence whether or not the expert attends to give evidence in person. Where however the expert is not called to give evidence the report will only be admissible with courts leave s30 CJA 2003 Court will consider: reasons expert cannot attend and risk of unfairness to the accused s30(3) Challenges:
Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our Advanced Criminal Litigation Notes.