Final Exam Flashcards
Competence
Legally able to testify and to be brought to court
Can communicate and understand the oath
Examples of each
Compellability
Forced to testify in trial
Be competent
Have to had disclosed something
Two people who commit the same crime can testify against each other
Charged separately on separate informations
Accomplice
Material
Does it help prove or disprove a fact in issue
Marital Privelege
Not compellable to disclose communication between them and their spouse
Law sees them as one
Lawyer privilege is another form
On Consent
Independent and impartial
No knowledge on the case
They do this all day every day
Timely disclosure
Material Witness
Material Witness
A witness that key evidence in the case that proves key facts in issue and they are crucial to the case
Judge needs to decide without them the case is unlikely to continue
Warrant
Benfits to making notes contemporaneously
Common sense
Police report
Relevant
Accurate
Reviewed
Spelling
Chronological
Clear concise
Time stamps
Rule of relevancy
Evidence must be relevant or connected to the facts in issue of the case, disprove to facts. Rationally connected, speak to the facts in issue.
Police notes
Qualified by
Made by them
Contemporaneously
In standard note book
Only needed to refresh their memory
Examination of Witnesses
Know all concepts, rules and goals of each process.
Exam in Chief
Cross Exam
Goal - Create reasonable doubt about the crown’s witness. Attack memory, credibility, and believability. Usually one or the other, but sometimes both.
Re-Exam
Clear up confusion, no leading questions, only open ended
Similar
Both made observations
Both are under oath to tell the truth
Both should be independent and impartial
Not any statistical data that a police officer is able to “perceive” better than a citizen
Difference - What sets us apart
Police are “trained observers” – taught to be more perceptive and to look for fine detail for certain offences. Example – impaired driving
Police are trained to make notes contemporaneous to the event and likely recall later on with much more detail and accuracy. That equals reliability
Crown Attorney
Always independent and impartial
Law Society has them their own unique professional codes of conduct, policies and procedures.
The role is to present the evidence, not help the police to get a conviction
Understand the full concept of the continual evaluation to the Crown Attorney that to continue or move forward with a criminal charge they must always feel they have a reasonable prospect of conviction.
Consider an Assault in Progress – Hearsay Exception
Assault in progress. The accused is making admissions and threats to the victim as he is assaulting him. Overheard by the officer or any citizen… Why is this highly likely to be admitted? Notice for the crime, adds to mens rea of the offence. Connects to the facts in issue. Material evidence. State of mind.
Impaired Driving – Opinion exception
Officer’s eventual opinion to formulate RG for the arrest… What is it based on?… What opinion is eventually formed? What rule of evidence does this violate? Why is it going to be allowed?
Bad Character example:
Hell’s Angles Biker charged with Trafficking cocaine, proceeds of Crime and Being a member of a criminal Organization. Probative Value vs Prejudice… Which one outweighs
There are four main exclusionary rules.
Hearsay
Opinion evidence
Bad Character
Examination in Chief
The first step in presenting evidence in court
Allows witnesses to tell their story, evidence is presented etc.
Open ended questions only, no leading questions.
Questioning from same side of counsel. Crown questions their witness, defence questions theirs.
Cross-Examination
Questioning done from opposing counsel.
Leading questions are almost always used.
Strategically asked questions
Goal is to cut holes in opposing counsel’s case, and to discredit the credibility and believability of the witness’s testimony.
Techniques are used (friendly, rapid fire questions etc)
Re-examination
Last major stage
No new evidence is presented, only must speak upon what has already been presented/brought up.
Main goal is to clear up any doubt, or confusion that may have arisen from cross examination.
Open ended questions only.
