Evidence

Question 1

Section 44

Answer 1

(1) No evidence can be put to the complainant about their sexual experience with any person other than the defendant except with permission of the judge

(2) No evidence/question can be put to a witness about their sexual reputation of the complainant except with permission of the judge

Question 2

Section 87

Answer 2

Protects a witness from having to state their address and having questions put to them about that information.

Includes town or community

Unless judge permission - has direct relevance to facts and contrary to interests of justice

Question 3

Section 88

Answer 3

Protect protect a complainant from having questions/statement put to them or to a witness about the complainant’s occupation

Judge can grant permission that has direct relevance. Exclusion would be contrary to interests of justice

Question 4

Section 121

Answer 4

The complainant’s evidence does not have to be corroborated unless perjury, false complainants etc

Not necessary for judge to warn jury about absence of corroboration

Question 5

Veracity

Answer 5

The disposition of a person to refrain from lying with a generally or in the proceedings

Question 6

Advantages of visually recording interviews

Answer 6

• greater quality and quantity of information
• Minimising trauma
• Reduce contamination by the interviewer
• Means for the witness to refresh their memory before judicial proceedings

Question 7

Section 103-105

Answer 7

Producing evidence by alternative means

Allowing the DVD interview to be played in court. The crown must apply to the court to use alternative means and it is the judge decision whether to allow this

Question 8

Preparing a witness for trial

Answer 8

Must be given the opportunity to view the video record before they testify in court

Meet with the crown prosecutor before the trial, shown the courtroom

Question 9

Transcripts

Answer 9

If used in court proceedings, given to the defendant or the lawyer as soon as practicable after the defendant has pleaded not guilty

Question 10

Section 35

Answer 10

Previous consistent statements rule

35(1) previous consistent statements are inadmissible

35(2) previous statements admissible if necessary to challenge witness’s accuracy. Based on
- previous inconsistent statement
- claim of recently invented evidence