witness : competance, compellabilty, and other specialities

Question 1

define competence

Answer 1

can a witness be asked to give evidence

Question 2

define compatability

Answer 2

can a witness be required to give evidence

Question 3

1995 act s.266(1)

s.266(2)

Answer 3

THE ACCUSED:
the accused was not competent Cannot compel you to testify

s.266(2) he is now competent but cancan only be called to his own app

Question 4

s.32 1995 act

Answer 4

THE ACCUSED
COMMENT ON FAILURE TO GIVE EVIDENCE.
the judge can comment on failure of an accused to give evidence . A pros can too and so may co-accused

Question 5

brown v macpherson

Answer 5

THE ACCUSEDCOMMENT ON FAILURE TO GIVE EVIDENCE

the judge/ prosecutor should exercise this in exceptional circumstances and with restraint

Question 6

scott v hm

Answer 6

THE ACCUSEDCOMMENT ON FAILURE TO GIVE EVIDENCE vague and contrictory evidence of the crown. so accused refused to comment. the judge REPEATADLY drew attention to thisOn appeal= quashed.

l.J clerk NORAMAN statements of the accused lack of evidence by the jusge should be made with restraint and only in special circumstances

Question 7

Shevlin v hm

Answer 7

THE ACCUSEDCOMMENT ON FAILURE TO GIVE EVIDENCE the cooaccussed is not restained the same way as a judge
council for co-accused has no restraint in commenting on the accused failure to testify AS LONG AS IT DOES NOT MISLEAD.

LECTURER ARGUES than the case should be quashed if an inference was being drawn by the co-accused by mentioning the accused lack of testify

Question 8

1995 act s.266(9)

Answer 8

the co-accused one accused person is COMPETANT but not COMPELLABLE for a co -accused.
if he gives evidence on his own behald he may be cross exam by co-accused .
however, both call a co-accused a s witness anf cross exam him when he gives evidence

Question 9

1995 act s.266(10)

Answer 9

the co-accused where a person ceases to be co-accused, he becomes a competent witness and compellable (unless guilty plea or acquitted)for any remaining part

Question 10

advocate v ferrie

Answer 10

the co-accused where a person ceased to be co-accused and becomes competent witness.

this is so eventhough they have not yet been sentences or formally convicted

Question 11

dow v macknight

Answer 11

THE ACCOMPLICE an accomplice who gives evidence is reffferd to as a socius criminis. an accused can be convicted only if there is evidence from the socii

Question 12

Docherty v hm adv

Answer 12

THE ACCOMPLICE a cum nota warning is no longer required
no surprise bench of 9

warning must be given everytime the the accomplice gave eveidence

Question 13

casey v hm

Answer 13

THE ACCOMPLICEmight be inappropriate to give warning. could not exam matters not directly relevant to charge to get evidence of accused waring will be appropriate if the defence of the co-accused incrim the accused

Question 14

macmilian v murray

Answer 14

THE ACCOMPLICE

where a crown calls a socius witness they require immunity from pros

Question 15

o’neil v wilson

Answer 15

THE ACCOMPLICE a crown witness who admits to crim activity during the course of testimony is not protected

Question 16

todd v hm

Answer 16

any relevant q could be asked even if it would incrim the accused spouse or partner.

the evidence of witnesses led for one accused is evidence against a co-aaccused whether elicited in chief or cross exam by the crown or another co-accused

Question 17

s,264 1995 aact

Answer 17

spouse can be competent and compellable for the pros unless they need not give evidence by being co-accused

Question 18

is the spouse of the accused competent/ compellable

Answer 18

prior 2011 spouse of accused was a=competent but not normally COMPELLABLE unless he was the alledged victim

now changes under s.86 2010 crim justice act the souse and civil partner of spouse now compellable

current law found In s.264 1995 act

Question 19

Davidson v macfarlyn

Answer 19

JUDGES COS/ HC judges are not competent to give evidence of proceedings before them inferior courts are

Question 20

mackintosh v wooster

Answer 20

prosecutors are competent witnesses although NOT in the trial they are currently conducting

Question 21

cambell v cohrane

Answer 21

defence agenrs can give evidence in cases they are conducting BUT it is not clear how the practical difficulties would be overcome

Question 22

s.8 contempt of court

Answer 22

JURORS

Cannot give evidence of their deliberations= contemto of court