Hearsay Flashcards
Twist
Identify what matter it is sought to prove.
Was it one of purposes of statement maker to cause someone’s to believe that matter?
T: texts relevant to whether there was existing buyer and seller relationship
T and K: need dat gun text not admissible as not purpose to cause anyone to believe had a gun (issue was whether T and K were in possession of gun)
R v L: not purpose to cause V to believe had been raped (was confession so admissible)
Acceptable reasons for W’s absence
S 116(2) CJA 2003
Written business docs as hearsay
S 117(1) and (2) CJA 2003
Masher
O left copy of M’s number plate in V’s car. V gave to police. Police’s record admitted. There was break in chain so should have been excluded
Red gestae (i) excited utterances
S 118(1) para 4(a) Andrews: new test: discounting possibility of mistake or concoction. Statement had been made to police some time after stabbing. Callander: same test applies to all res gestae exceptions
Res gestae (ii) statements accompanying acts
S 118(1) para 4(b) McCay: officer allowed to state which number W had given identifying D at pre trial parade
Res gestae (iii) statements relating to maker’s intention or emotion
S 118(1) para 4(c) Gilfoyle: suicide notes
Confessions as exception to hearsay
S 118(1) para 5
Statements made in furtherance of common purpose as exception to hearsay
S 118(1) para 7
Hume: court properly admitted texts sent between IRA terrorists
Statement made by one party to conspiracy is admissible against any other party to conspiracy as evidence of its truth
Expert evidence as exception to hearsay
S 118(1) para 8
Inclusionary discretion of hearsay
S 114(1)(d) Considerations: Probative value Extent of other evidence Circumstances in which made Reliability of maker Difficulty in challenging statement Extent to which such difficulty would prejudice D
Z
S 114(1)(d) should be cautiously applied so as not to circumvent Parliaments rules under s 116
Burton
S 114(1)(d) appropriately applied as not right to call alleged V who was child. Exceptional case
McLean
Out of court statements made by one D against another admissible under s 114(1)(d)
M allowed to adduce statement made by coD1 that coD2 had stabbed V, not M.
Y (2008)
S 114(1)(d) available for all types of hearsay, including confession. S 118(1) para 5 did not exclude application of s 114(1)(d)
Finch
Where confession not admissible under PACE as person who pleaded guilty was no longer coD, confession may be admissible under s 114(1)(d)
Warnick
X gave police number plate of car seen fleeing scene. Judge refused application for statement to be adduced under s 116(2)(e) but admitted it under s 114(1)(d). Held wrongly admitted as didn’t satisfy s 114(2)(g)
Mayers
Pros may not adduce anonymous hearsay statements
S 121(1)(c)
Court may admit multiple hearsay not otherwise admissible if satisfied value of evidence is so high interests of justice require later statement to be admissible for that purpose
Eg Thakrar: 2 men tried for murder. D1 fled to Cyprus first and statements rightly admitted from Ws who D1 had spoken to containing admissions.
S 126(1) CJA 2003
Exclusionary discretion: taking into account danger that to admit evidence would result in undue waste of time
S 124 CJA 2003
Evidence which would have been admissible as relevant were W to have testified is also admissible in W’s absence (to challenge credibility)
S 125(1) CJA 2003
Power to stay proceedings if case based wholly or partly on unconvincing hearsay
Art 6(3)(d)
Everyone has right to examine or have examined Ws against him.
Right to confront therefore not absolute as have examined may include pre trial exam (eg doorson v Netherlands)
Krostovski v Netherlands
Art 6 violated where non appearance of W and hearsay only or important part of evidence
