CIB009 - Evidence

Question 1

Explain the difference between the terms “beyond reasonable doubt” and on the “balance of probabilities”?

Answer 1

Beyond reasonable doubt is the standard of proof required for the Prosecution to prove its case. It means that jurors must be satisfied of guilt before they can convict.
Balance of probabilities is the standard of proof required for the defence to prove a particular element of its case. It means it must carry a reasonable degree of probability, but not so high as is required in a criminal case. If the evidence is such that the tribunal can say: “We think it more probable than not”, the burden is discharged; if the probabilities are equal, the burden is not discharged.

Question 2

What is evidence?

Answer 2

“Evidence” is the term for the whole body of material which a court or tribunal may take into account in reaching their decision.

Question 3

What is admissible evidence?

Answer 3

Evidence is admissible if it is legally able to be received by a court.

Question 4

What are Facts in issue?

Answer 4

The facts which in law need to be proven to succeed with the case; Usually alleged by the charging document and denied by a not guilty plea.
• the prosecution must prove to establish the elements of the offence, or
• the defendant must prove to succeed with a defence, in respect of which he or she carries the burden of proof.

Question 5

The “weight” of evidence is its value in relation to the facts in issue. The value will depend on a wide range of factors, such as?

Answer 5

The extent to which, if accepted, it is directly relevant to or conclusive of, those facts
• the extent to which it is supported or contradicted by other evidence produced
• the veracity of the witness.

Question 6

What is the definition of incriminate?

Answer 6

To incriminate is to provide information that is reasonably likely to lead to, or increase the likelihood of, the prosecution of a person for a criminal offence.

Question 7

What is a statement?

Answer 7

This is a spoken or written assertion by a person, or non-verbal conduct of a person intended by that person as an assertion of any matter

Question 8

What is the Woolmington v DPP principle: presumption of innocence?

Answer 8

This principle establishes that, subject to specific statutory exceptions, the burden of proof lies clearly with the prosecution in relation to all of the elements of the offence.

Question 9

In a proceeding, evidence may be given in the following ways?

Answer 9

− The ordinary way
− The alternative way such as by video link
− Any other way provided for by the Evidence Act 2006 or any other enactment.

Question 10

The burden of proof lies with the prosecution (Woolmington principle) except where?

Answer 10

− The defence of insanity is claimed
− specific statutory exceptions exist
− the offence is a public welfare regulatory offence.

Question 11

The standard of proof where the legal burden is on the prosecution is “beyond reasonable doubt”. Where the defence bears the burden, it need only be proved on the?

Answer 11

Balance of probabilities

Question 12

What are two exceptions to the burden of proof being on the prosecution?

Answer 12

Defence of insanity.
Possess an offensive weapon in circumstances that prima facile show an intention to use it, defendant has no prove no such intent.

Question 13

Describe 4 matters which the Judge may consider in determining whether veracity evidence is substantially helpful?

Answer 13

(a) lack of veracity on the part of the person when under a legal obligation to tell the truth (for example, in an earlier proceeding or in a signed declaration):
(b) that the person has been convicted of 1 or more offences that indicate a propensity for dishonesty or lack of veracity:
(c) any previous inconsistent statements made by the person:
(d) bias on the part of the person:
(e) a motive on the part of the person to be untruthful.

Question 14

What is the definition of circumstantial evidence?

Answer 14

Circumstantial evidence is a fact from which the judge or jury may infer the existence of a fact in issue. As such, it offers indirect proof of a fact in issue.

Question 15

Define both “Presumption of law” and Presumption of fact”?

Answer 15

Presumptions of law are inferences that have been expressly drawn by law from particular facts.
Presumptions of fact are those that the mind naturally and logically draws from the given facts.

Question 16

Section 16(2) defines what is meant by “unavailable as a witness”?

Answer 16

(a) is dead; or
(b) is outside New Zealand and it is not reasonably practicable for him or her to be a witness; or
(c) is unfit to be a witness because of age or physical or mental condition; or
(d) cannot with reasonable diligence be identified or found; or
(e) is not compellable to give evidence.

Question 17

Why is opinion evidence unreliable?

Answer 17

• where a witness offers a bare opinion it holds little probative weight
• there is a danger that a witness offering opinion evidence will “usurp” the function of the tribunal of fact, which is to draw the necessary inferences from the facts presented in evidence. The opinion evidence could confuse the tribunal of fact and prolong proceedings.
• a witness’s evidence of opinion may be based on other evidence which, if stated expressly, would be inadmissible (for example, where an opinion is based largely on propensity evidence).

Question 18

Describe privilege and give two examples?

Answer 18

A privilege in relation to the giving of evidence is the right to refuse to disclose or to prevent disclosure of what would otherwise be admissible.
• communications with legal advisors – section 54
• solicitors’ trust accounts – section 55
• preparatory materials for proceedings – section 56
• settlement negotiations or mediation – section 57
• communications with ministers of religion – section 58
• information obtained by medical practitioners and clinical psychologists – section 59.

Question 19

What are three reasons why leading questions are not permitted?

Answer 19

• There is a natural tendency for people to agree with suggestions put to them by saying “yes”, even if those suggestions do not precisely accord with their own view of what happened.
• Counsel asking leading questions of their own witnesses can more easily elicit the answers which they wish to receive, thereby reducing the spontaneity and genuineness of the testimony.
• There is a danger that leading questions will result in the manipulation or construction of the evidence through collusion, conscious or otherwise, between counsel and the witness.

Question 20

What are four reasons that evidence rebuttal can be recalled?

Answer 20

• relates to a purely formal matter
• relates to a matter arising out of the conduct of the defence, the relevance of which could not reasonably have been foreseen (the most common ground for leave to be granted)
• was not available or admissible before the prosecution’s case was closed, or
• is required to be admitted in the interests of justice for any other reason.
What are four types of questions that the judge can state are unacceptable?
Improper, unfair, misleading, needlessly repetitive, or expressed in language that is too complicated for the witness to understand.

Question 21

Define corroboration and list two offences which corroboration is required by the prosecution?

Answer 21

It is independent evidence that tends to confirm or support some fact of which other evidence is given and implicates the defendant in the crime charged.

(a) perjury (section 108 of the Crimes Act 1961); and
(b) false oaths (section 110 of the Crimes Act 1961); and
(c) false statements or declarations (section 111 of the Crimes Act 1961); and
(d) treason (section 73 of the Crimes Act 1961).

Question 22

Explain the an 11 year old’s parents what the judge will expect of them in terms of oath and affirmation?

Answer 22

Promise to tell the truth

Question 23

Explain two ways of giving evidence?

Answer 23

Ordinary way - orally in court room or affidavit written for court
Alternative way - behind screen, video link, video previously made

Question 24

What is the purpose of cross examination?

Answer 24

to elicit information supporting the case of the party conducting the cross-examination
• to challenge the accuracy of the testimony given in evidence-in-chief

Question 25

If a witness has memory loss, citing legislation can they be called hostile?

Answer 25

A clear distinction must be drawn between unfavourable witnesses and hostile witnesses. Witnesses who simply fail to come up to brief may be unfavourable to the party calling them, but they are not necessarily hostile.
This indicates that the simple fact that a witness gives evidence adverse to a party, suffers a loss of memory, or provides evidence inconsistent with another statement does not, by itself, justify finding the witness is hostile.

Question 26

What are the four principles of evidence law?

Answer 26

Public Interest
Unfairness
Relevance
Reliability

Question 27

What was found in R v Wanhalla in relation to reasonable doubt?

Answer 27

If after careful and impartial consideration of all the evidence, you are sure the accused is guilty you must find him or her guilty.

Question 28

Explain the term “Facts that prove the charge”?

Answer 28

The facts must prove the elements of the charge, and the evidence should be made up of facts that prove the charge.

Question 29

Define “Presumption of fact” and give an example?

Answer 29

Presumptions of fact are those that the mind naturally and logically draws from the given facts. For example, one presumes that a person has guilty knowledge if they have possession of recently stolen goods.

Question 30

Define “Hearsay statement”?

Answer 30

This is a statement that was made by a person other than a witness, and is offered in evidence in the proceeding to prove the truth of its contents. This definition means that out-of-court statements made by a “witness” are not excluded by the hearsay rule because the maker is available to be cross-examined. Such statements may still be excluded by a different rule. A statement offered for some purpose other than proving the truth of its contents, for example merely to show that the statement was made or uttered, is not a hearsay statement.

Question 31

What is the Judge’s role in trial by Jury?

Answer 31

• decide all questions concerning the admissibility of evidence
• explain and enforce the general principles of law applying to the point at issue
• instruct the jury on the rules of law by which the evidence is to be weighed once it has been submitted.

Question 32

What is Voir Dire?

Answer 32

Section 15 of the Evidence Act 2006 governs evidence given by a witness to prove the facts necessary for deciding whether some other evidence should be admitted in a proceeding. Such a hearing is commonly referred to as a “voir dire”,

Question 33

What are two alternate ways of giving evidence?

Answer 33

Behind screen, video link, previously made video.

Question 34

What are four of the six purposes of evidential law?

Answer 34

The purpose of this Act is to help secure the just determination of proceedings by—

(a) providing for facts to be established by the application of logical rules; and
(b) providing rules of evidence that recognise the importance of the rights affirmed by the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990; and
(c) promoting fairness to parties and witnesses; and
(d) protecting rights of confidentiality and other important public interests; and
(e) avoiding unjustifiable expense and delay; and
(f) enhancing access to the law of evidence.

Question 35

What does propensity evidence include?

Answer 35

Propensity as to actions

Propensity as to state of mind (eg a lack of inhibition, a love of violence).

Question 36

What are four examples of privilege and the definition?

Answer 36

A privilege in relation to the giving of evidence is the right to refuse to disclose or to prevent disclosure of what would otherwise be admissible.
• communications with legal advisors – section 54
• solicitors’ trust accounts – section 55
• preparatory materials for proceedings – section 56
• settlement negotiations or mediation – section 57
• communications with ministers of religion – section 58
• information obtained by medical practitioners and clinical psychologists – section 59.
• privilege against self-incrimination – section 60
• informer privilege – section 64.

Question 37

What is the definition of “leading question” and what is the general rule?

Answer 37

One that directly or indirectly suggests a particular answer to the question.
Leading questions may not be asked during evidence in chief or re-examination.

Question 38

What is the definition of “hostile witness”?

Answer 38

• exhibits, or appears to exhibit, a lack of veracity when giving evidence unfavourable to the party who called the witness on a matter about which the witness may reasonably be supposed to have knowledge; or
• gives evidence that is inconsistent with a statement made by that witness in a manner that exhibits, or appears to exhibit, an intention to be unhelpful to the party who called the witness; or
• refuses to answer questions or deliberately withholds evidence.

Question 39

Section 125(1) - Does a Judge have to give a warning where a child is a witness, if not why?

Answer 39

(1)In a criminal proceeding tried with a jury in which the complainant is a child at the time when the proceeding commences, the Judge must not give any warning to the jury about the absence of corroboration of the evidence of the complainant if the Judge would not have given that kind of a warning had the complainant been an adult.

Question 40

The prohibition on leading questions is based on the belief that it will produce unreliable evidence for the following reasons?

Answer 40

• There is a natural tendency for people to agree with suggestions put to them by saying “yes”, even if those suggestions do not precisely accord with their own view of what happened.
• Counsel asking leading questions of their own witnesses can more easily elicit the answers which they wish to receive, thereby reducing the spontaneity and genuineness of the testimony.
• There is a danger that leading questions will result in the manipulation or construction of the evidence through collusion, conscious or otherwise, between counsel and the witness.

Question 41

Section 85(1) In any proceeding, the Judge may disallow, or direct that a witness is not obliged to answer, any question that the Judge considers?

Answer 41

improper, unfair, misleading, needlessly repetitive, or expressed in language that is too complicated for the witness to understand.

Question 42

What is judicial notice?

Answer 42

When a court takes judicial notice of a fact, it declares that it will find that the fact exists, or will direct the jury to do so even though evidence has not been established that the fact exists.

Question 43

Who is not compellable to give evidence?

Answer 43

Under s 74, judges, in respect of their conduct as a judge, the Sovereign, Governor-General, and Sovereign or Head of State of a foreign country, are not compellable to give evidence.

Question 44

What are the six objectives of the Evidence Act 2006 as set out in s6?

Answer 44

− providing for facts to be established by the application of logical rules
− providing rules of evidence that recognise the importance of the rights affirmed by the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990
− promoting fairness to parties and witnesses
− protecting rights of confidentiality and other important public interests
− avoiding unjustifiable expense and delay, and
− enhancing access to the law of evidence.

Question 45

Explain the difference between the terms “beyond reasonable doubt” and on the “balance of probabilities”?

Answer 45

Beyond reasonable doubt is the standard of proof required for the Prosecution to prove its case. It means that jurors must be satisfied of guilt before they can convict.
Balance of probabilities is the standard of proof required for the defence to prove a particular element of its case. It means it must carry a reasonable degree of probability, but not so high as is required in a criminal case. If the evidence is such that the tribunal can say: “We think it more probable than not”, the burden is discharged; if the probabilities are equal, the burden is not discharged.

Question 46

What are the two ways in which unfairness usually arises and may result in the exclusion of evidence?

Answer 46

Evidence may be excluded if it would result in some unfair prejudice in the proceeding.
Evidence not prejudicial in itself in terms of the actual verdict may still be excluded where it has been obtained in circumstances that would make its admission against the defendant unfair. The most obvious example of this is where a defendant’s statement has been obtained by unfair or improper methods. The “confession” itself may well be impeccable evidence, but the way in which it was obtained may well lead to its exclusion under the fairness discretion.

Question 47

Specific restrictions aside, if evidence is admitted, for what purposes can it be used?

Answer 47

Once evidence is admitted, it can generally be used for all purposes: “the statute proceeds on the basis that generally speaking evidence is either admissible for all purposes or it is not admissible at all”

Question 48

What is the propensity rule of evidence?

Answer 48

Propensity evidence means evidence that tends to show a person’s propensity to act in a particular way or to have a particular state of mind, being evidence of acts, omissions, events, or circumstances with which a person is alleged to have been involved, but does not include evidence of an act or omission that is:
− one of the elements of the offence for which the person is being tried, or
− the cause of action in the proceeding in question.

Question 49

Define an “expert” under s 4 of the Evidence Act 2006?

Answer 49

Section 4 of the Act defines an “expert” as “a person who has specialised knowledge or skill, based on training, study or experience”

Question 50

When would a communication with a legal adviser be ‘privileged’?

Answer 50

A communication with a legal adviser would be privileged when:

(a) The communication must be intended to be confidential.
(b) The communication must be made for the purposes of obtaining or giving legal services

Question 51

An associated defendant is not compellable to give evidence for or against a defendant unless two situations apply. State these two situations?

Answer 51

An associated defendant is not compellable to give evidence for or against a defendant unless two situations apply.

(a) The associated defendant is being tried separately from the defendant; or
(b) The proceeding against the associated defendant has been determined.

Question 52

What is the meaning of self-incrimination under s 4 of the Evidence Act 2006?

Answer 52

Self-incrimination is “the provision by a person of information that could reasonably lead to, or increase the likelihood of, the prosecution of that person for a criminal offence” (s 4).

Question 53

What types of offences are considered by law to require corroboration?

Answer 53

There are two types of offence in which the unsupported evidence of one witness is insufficient to support a conviction. These are:
− perjury and related offences (ss 108, 110 and 111 Crimes Act), and
− treason (s 73 Crimes Act).

Question 54

What is the role of a judge in a trial by jury?

Answer 54

− decide all questions concerning the admissibility of evidence
− determine whether there is any evidence that is fit to be submitted to the jury for its consideration
− explain and enforce the general principles of law applying to the point at issue
− instruct the jury on the rules of law by which the evidence is to be weighed once it has been submitted.

Question 55

What is the purpose of cross-examination?

Answer 55

− to elicit information supporting the case of the party conducting the cross-examination
− to challenge the accuracy of the testimony given in evidence-in-chief, for example, by casting doubt on the witness’s veracity, or by eliciting contradictory testimony.

Question 56

Under the Act, a hearsay statement is defined as (s4)?

Answer 56

“a statement that –

(a) was made by a person other than a witness; and
(b) is offered in evidence at the proceeding to prove the truth of its contents”

Question 57

Can a witness refresh memory before Court, explain?

Answer 57

Witnesses may, before they give evidence in court, refresh their memory by reference to statements, briefs of evidence, or a deposition statement prepared on the basis of statements which they may have made some months before.

Question 58

A previous consistent statement is admissible if? (Not exceptions)

Answer 58

(a) the circumstances relating to the statement provide reasonable assurance that the statement is reliable; and
(b) the statement provides the court with information that the witness is unable to recall.

Question 59

Define Relevance?

Answer 59

Evidence is relevant “if it has a tendency to prove or disprove anything that is of consequence to the determination of a proceeding”

Question 60

What is the definition of a witness?

Answer 60

Person who gives evidence and is able to be cross-examined in a proceeding.

Question 61

In a criminal proceeding tried with a jury the Judge must consider whether to give a warning under subsection 122(1) whenever the following evidence is given?

Answer 61

• Hearsay
• Statement by Defendant, if that is the only evidence
• witness evidence who may have a motive to give false evidence
• evidence of a statement by the defendant to another person while detained in prison, police station or another detention place
• evidence about conduct of the defendant more than 10 years ago.

Question 62

All relevant evidence is admissible in a proceeding except evidence that is?

Answer 62

-inadmissible under this act or any other or:
-excluded under this act or any other
Evidence that is not relevant is not admissible in a proceeding.

Question 63

What is the definition of Direct Evidence?

Answer 63

This is any evidence given by a witness as to a fact in issue that he or she has seen heard or otherwise experienced.

Question 64

What is Miller v Minister of pensions - Balance of Probabilities?

Answer 64

Where the defence is required to prove a particular element such as insanity, on the balance of probabilities, it must simply show that it is more probable than not.

Question 65

The test of relevance can be broken down into two prongs (Materiality and Probativeness)?

Answer 65

Materiality asks whether the evidence in the case is offered on a matter or a fact at issue (of consequence to the determination of the proceeding S7(3). •
Probativeness asks whether the evidence has a logical tendency to prove or disprove the material proposition on which it is offered S7(3).•

Question 66

General admissibility of opinions in evidence;

Answer 66

A witness may state an opinion in evidence in a proceeding if that opinion is necessary to enable the
witness to communicate, or the fact finder to understand, what the witness saw, heard or otherwise perceived.

Question 67

If the evidence is opinion evidence, then in order to comply with S25 the opinion must?

Answer 67

Be that of an expert;
Comprise expert evidence and
Offer substantial help to the fact finder in understanding other evidence or ascertaining any fact in the proceeding.

Question 68

In any proceeding, a leading question must not be put to a witness in examination in chief or re-examination unless?

Answer 68

a. the question relates to introductory or undisputed matters or
b. the question is put with the consent of all other parties or
c. the Judge in exercise of the Judges discretion allows the question.

Question 69

If a witness wishes to consult a document while giving evidence, the following conditions, designed to ensure so far as possible the accuracy of the document must be satisfied?

Answer 69

The leave of the judge must be obtained the document must be shown to every other party in the proceeding S90 (5) requires the document to have been made or adopted by a witness at a time when his or her memory was fresh. Whether a document was made while the memory was fresh depends on the circumstances of the individual case.

Question 70

There are a number of circumstances where a Judge may direct the jury that evidence should be scrutinized with particular care when? (Six)

Answer 70

Judicial warning that evidence may be unreliable
Judicial directions about certain ways of giving evidence
Judicial warnings about lies
Judicial directions about children’s evidence
Judicial warnings about identification evidence
Delayed complaints or failure to complain in sexual cases

Question 71

Unfairness can cover a variety of situations and is a matter for discretion of trial Judge, it usually arises in two ways?

Answer 71

Evidence may be excluded if it would result in some unfair prejudice in the proceeding.
Evidence not prejudicial in itself in terms of the actual verdict may still be excluded where it has been obtained in circumstances that would make its admission against the accused unfair.

Question 72

The exclusive rules of evidence deal with?

Answer 72

Veracity
 Propensity 
 Hearsay
 Opinion 
 Identification 
 Improperly obtained evidence

Question 73

The prosecution in a criminal proceeding may offer evidence about a defendant’s veracity only if?

Answer 73

a. The defendant has offered evidence about his or her veracity or has challenged the veracity of a
prosecution witness by reference other than the facts in issue; and
b. the Judge permits the prosecution to do so.

Question 74

Explain what “All people are eligible and compellable” means?

Answer 74

A witness is eligible if they are lawfully able to give evidence on behalf of both prosecution and defence. A witness is compellable if they can be required to give evidence against their will for both prosecution and defence. Once a witness has entered the witness box and been sworn they are under a compellable obligation to answer all questions put to them.

Question 75

Evidence Act S.16(1) defines “Circumstances” in relation to a statement by a person who is not a witness include?

Answer 75

a. the nature of the statement and
b. the contents of the statement and
c. the circumstances that relate to the making of the statement and
d. any circumstances that relate to the veracity of the person and
e. any circumstances that relate to the accuracy of the observation of the person.

Question 76

What is Section 59, information obtained by medical practitioners?

Answer 76

Disclosures made to practitioners will be covered by privilege but the person must make those disclosures personally. However it does not apply if they have been ordered by a Judge for an examination by a practitioner.

Question 77

Witnesses who are 12 years of age or older must take an oath or affirmation before giving evidence S77. Witnesses under the age of 12 must?

Answer 77

Be informed by the judge of the importance of telling the truth and not telling lies, and;
After being given that information, make a promise to tell the truth before giving evidence.

Question 78

Previous consistent statements rule?

Answer 78

A previous statement of a witness that is consistent with the witness’s evidence is admissible to the extent that the statement is necessary to respond to a challenge to the witness’s veracity or accuracy, based on a previous inconsistent statement of the witness or on a claim of recent invention on the part of the witness.

Question 79

If a hostile witness application is granted, the witness may be asked question that include?

Answer 79

Asking leading questions
Asking questions designed to probe the accuracy of memory and perception Asking questions as to prior inconsistency statements and
Other challenges to veracity, including evidence from other witnesses

Question 80

Explain what is meant by “burden of proof?

Answer 80

Whoever asserts something must prove it
In criminal cases the burden of proof is on the Crown, i.e. the prosecutor must prove the accused guilty rather that the accused person prove their innocence. All that a defendant needs to do is to raise a doubt as to their guilt.
In a criminal case the prosecution must prove every essential ingredient of the offence beyond a reasonable doubt.

Question 81

In relation to the reliability of hearsay statements, briefly outline the four reasons why hearsay evidence is generally excluded?

Answer 81

Where the maker of a statement is not called as a witness, there is no opportunity to cross-examine them regarding its contents, the circumstances in which it was made, and so on.
The rule addresses the concern that juries cannot evaluate evidence properly without being able to see the demeanor of the person who made the statement in question
There is a danger that witnesses will make mistakes about the meaning or content of statements made by other people
The reason for the rule’s existence is therefore the danger attributing undeserved weight to evidence that cannot be adequately or properly tested. There needs to be a ‘reasonable assurance’ of reliability, which means that the evidence must be reliable enough for the fact-finder to consider it, and draw its own conclusions as to weight.

Question 82

What is a leading question?

Give two exceptions to the general rule concerning leading questions?

Answer 82

(a) A leading question suggests the desired answer or assumes that disputed facts exist
(b) Any two of the following:
Introductory or disputed facts
Identification
Assisting memory
Contradiction
Hostile witnesses

Question 83

Section 92(1) of the Evidence Act 2006 outlines the duty to cross-examine a witness. When does the duty to cross-examine a witness arise?

Answer 83

The topic of cross-examination must deal with ‘significant matters’ in the proceeding
The matters must be ‘relevant’ and ‘in issue’ in the proceeding
The matters must ‘contradict the evidence of the witness’ and
The witness may ‘reasonably be expected to be in a position to give admissible evidence on those matters’.

Question 84

What are the two exceptions to the general prohibition on previous consistent statement (Section 35 of the Evidence Act 2006)?

Answer 84

To respond to a challenge to the witness’s veracity or accuracy, based on a previous inconsistent statement of the witness, or
On a claim of recent invention on the part of the witness

Question 85

Name the exceptions to the veracity and propensity rule that do not apply to bail or sentencing hearings?

Answer 85

The evidence relates directly or indirectly to the sexual experience of the complainant with any person other that the defendant
The evidence relates directly or indirectly to his or her reputation in sexual matters.

Question 86

What are two types of questions that can be asked once a witness has been declared hostile?

Answer 86

When a witness has been declared hostile, the prosecutor may conduct the examination-in-chief like
a cross examination. The witness may be (any two of):
Asked leading questions
Challenged with regard to how they know the facts about that which they are testifying
Tested on such matters as to their accuracy of memory and perception.

Question 87

Where the onus falls on the defence to prove a particular element, the standard of proof required is?

Answer 87

on the balance of probabilities

Question 88

Circumstantial evidence has been defined as?

Answer 88

A fact that by inference can prove another fact in issue

Question 89

Once the judge has granted an application to treat a witness as hostile, that witness may be:

Answer 89

1. Asked leading questions
2. Questions as to prior inconsistent statements
3. Asked any question whatsoever whether relevant to the matter under inquiry or not
4. Tested on such matters as the accuracy of his/her memory and perception
   1, 2 and 4 only are correct

Question 90

What is the meaning of veracity?

Answer 90

A disposition to refrain from lying

Question 91

The general purpose of the examination-in-chief is to?

Answer 91

Elicit testimony that supports the case of the party calling that witness

Question 92

Corroboration of a complainant’s statement is not necessary in a criminal proceeding except for the following offence?

Answer 92

False oaths

Question 93

A presumption of law?

Answer 93

May be rebuttable or irrebuttable

Question 94

The Court has a discretion to include propensity evidence against a defendant, if?

Answer 94

The probative value of the evidence outweighs its prejudicial effect

Question 95

It is not necessary in court to prove “uncontroverted facts.” These are admitted as?

Answer 95

Judicial notice

Question 96

A presumption of fact is?

Answer 96

Always rebuttable

Question 97

It is not necessary in court to prove facts such as ‘the season of summer in New Zealand is over the period of December to February”, these facts are admitted as?

Answer 97

Judicial notice

Question 98

What are Facts in issue?

Answer 98

The facts which in law need to be proven to succeed with the case. Usually alleged by the charging document and denied by a not guilty plea.
• the prosecution must prove to establish the elements of the offence, or
• the defendant must prove to succeed with a defence, in respect of which he or she carries the burden of proof.

Question 99

The “weight” of evidence is its value in relation to the facts in issue. The value will depend on a wide range of factors, such as?

Answer 99

• The extent to which, if accepted, it is directly relevant to or conclusive of, those facts
• the extent to which it is supported or contradicted by other evidence produced
• the veracity of the witness.

Question 100

What is the definition of incriminate?

Answer 100

To incriminate is to provide information that is reasonably likely to lead to, or increase the likelihood of, the prosecution of a person for a criminal offence.

Question 101

What is a statement?

Answer 101

This is a spoken or written assertion by a person, or non-verbal conduct of a person intended by that person as an assertion of any matter