Recent HEARSAY EVIDENCE case law (late 2011)

[exdc]

A fairly common question asked on AB law section is whether certain court cases, particularly domestic violence cases, are likely to continue in the absense or withdrawal of the victims evidence (and therefore could Hearsay evidence be used to continue prosecution etc).

For reference please see the following case-law which has given further guidance :

R v Tindle [2011] EWCA Crim 2341
http://www.bllaw.co.u...ct_11/r_v_tindle.aspx


Summary : Hearsay

Lazy prosecutors beware! If a complainant withdraws her complaint and no effort is made to try to get her to court the hearsay provisions do not make her witness statement or the transcript of a 999 call admissible. Section 116 (2) (d) (not s.116 (1) (d) as the judgment wrongly suggests) only applies where reasonable efforts have been made to get the witness to court failing which a judge should not use s.114 (1) (d) to get the prosecution out of a hole they have created for themselves. The Crown did not rely on fear on the part of the complainant (s.116 (2) (e)) since there was no evidence of fear. The judge had also failed to consider properly s. 114 (2) (c) (the importance of the evidence in the case). It would be very rare for hearsay to be allowed where reasonable steps to get the witness to court had not been taken. R.v. Tindle [2011] EWCA Crim 2341, (CLW 11/43/4) (20/10/2011).

[bednobs]

eh? Are all complainants female then?

[exdc]

Fair point (copy/pasted) but should of checked.