Criminal Litigation SGS 15 Hearsay Exceptions

Card Set Information

Author:
billsykes
ID:
210160
Filename:
Criminal Litigation SGS 15 Hearsay Exceptions
Updated:
2013-03-30 17:38:03
Tags:
Criminal Litigation SGS 15
Folders:

Description:
Criminal Litigation SGS 15
Show Answers:

Home > Flashcards > Print Preview

The flashcards below were created by user billsykes on FreezingBlue Flashcards. What would you like to do?


  1. Ronnie Biggs is on trial for robbing a mail train and murdering the security guard, Jess. 10 months after the offence, coverage of the robbery on the television programme “Crime Watch” prompted a phone call from a viewer to the information hot-line. The caller told the operator that they knew the robber was Biggs and where the police were likely to find him. Acting on this information, the police arrested Biggs. The caller gave the operator their name and address, but when the police called at the address a week later to take a statement, the landlord of the premises said that the tenant in question had disappeared overnight taking all their possessions with them. The witness cannot be found. The Prosecution wish to adduce the tape recording of the telephone call.

    Which of the following is CORRECT?

    [A] The tape of the telephone call is admissible hearsay evidence by virtue of section 116 CJA 2003.

    [B] The tape of the telephone call is admissible by virtue of section 114 CJA 2003, but only if one of the conditions in section 116(2) is satisfied. 

    [C] The tape of the telephone call is admissible as it forms part of the res gestae

    [D] The tape of the telephone call is admissible original evidence.
    [A] The tape of the telephone call is admissible hearsay evidence by virtue of section 116 CJA 2003.

    CORRECT – the evidence is relevant and would be admissible if given orally; the identity of the witness is established; and one of the statutory reasons for not calling the maker of the statement is present – the witness cannot be found (s.116(2)(d) CJA 2003).
  2. Forensic expert analysis of the bullet that killed Jess shows it to have unusual markings, and police investigations have traced the bullet to a shop called Uniqueshot Ltd. A printout of the shop’s record of sales shows a sale of the type of bullet that killed Jess to a Mr. R. Briggs who paid by credit card three months prior to the robbery. The sale was written down in a ledger by the sales assistant and then recorded from the ledger onto the shop’s database by the shop manager.

    Which of the following is CORRECT?

    [A] The shop records are admissible documentary hearsay under section 117 CJA 2003, but one of the conditions in section 116(2) must be satisfied.

    [B] The printout is inadmissible unless the manager of the shop is called to give evidence of the compilation and custody of the shop’s database.

    [C] The shop records are admissible documentary hearsay under section 116 CJA 2003. 

    [D] The shop records are admissible documentary hearsay under section 117 CJA 2003. It will not be necessary to satisfy one of the conditions in section 116(2).
    [D] The shop records are admissible documentary hearsay under section 117 CJA 2003. It will not be necessary to satisfy one of the conditions in section 116(2).  

    CORRECT. the document is a business record. the crown will want to adduce evidence of the statement contained in it to prove that what was said was true. it is therefore hearsay. the document contains multiple hearsay. for these reasons, the first limb of s.117 applies.
  3. Bill and Ben are accused of robbery outside BPP’s Law School in Holborn. No forensic evidence linking either man with the scene was obtained, but the incident was witnessed by a number of people who claim they saw the robbers escape on a motorbike. One witness, George, made a note of the registration number of the motorbike, as GRO 1T. He gave this note to PC Pandy at the scene. Another witness, Zippy, told PC Pandy that he had seen the registration number GRO 1T on the motorbike; the officer made a note of this information. DVLA records show that the motorbike was registered to Bill. George has since been the victim of a road traffic accident and is in a coma from which his doctors think it is unlikely he will ever recover. Zippy is in Paraguay on a field trip for his University degree course.

    Examine the following options:

    i) George’s note is admissible hearsay under section 116 CJA 2003. 

    ii) What Zippy told PC Pandy is admissible hearsay under section 117 CJA 2003. 

    iii) The DVLA records are admissible hearsay under section 117 CJA 2003. 

    iv) What Zippy told PC Pandy cannot be given in evidence unless PC Pandy got Zippy to verify his note of the conversation. 

    Which of the above options are CORRECT?

    [A] i), ii) and iii)
    [B] i) and iii)
    [C] i), iii) and iv)
    [D] ii) and iii)
    A] i), ii) and iii)

    i) George’s note is admissible hearsay under section 116 CJA 2003. CORRECT. see S.116(2)(b) CJA 2003

    ii) What Zippy told PC Pandy is admissible hearsay under section 117 CJA 2003. CORRECT – see S.117((5) and cases such as Kelsey (1982) 74 Cr.App.R.213 and MCLEAN (1967) 52 Cr.App.R.80

    iii) The DVLA records are admissible hearsay under section 117 CJA 2003. CORRECT. see first limb of s.117 CJA 2003
  4. Nina witnessed a murder allegedly carried out by Malcolm. She gave a statement to the police but has subsequently told the officer in charge of the case that she does not wish to give evidence at Malcolm’s trial because she fears reprisals from his associates.

    Which of the following is CORRECT?

    [A] Nina’s evidence can only be received at trial if she turns up to give evidence in person.

    [B] Nina’s statement can be read out at Malcolm’s trial as of right as she is in fear. 

    [C] Nina’s statement may be read out at Malcolm’s trial if the Court gives leave for this to happen.

    [D] Nina’s statement can only be read out in her absence if she is dead.
    [C] Nina’s statement may be read out at Malcolm’s trial if the Court gives leave for this to happen.

    See s.116(2)(e) CJA 2003.
  5. What are the preserved common law exceptions to hearsay?
    1. Confessions

    2. Res Gestae - statement made in the heat of the moment. The maker of the statement would have nothing but the truth on his mind.

    • R v Andrew (1987) -
    • a victim of a stabbing
    • told the people who found him the name of his killer
    • just before he died.
  6. If the parties agree, is hearsay evidence admissible?
    Yes
  7. What are the two main statutory exceptions to the hearsay rule?
    s.116 CJA 2003 (General section)

    If the evidence would have been otherwise admissible, hearsay evidence would be admissible if the maker

    • (a) is dead;
    • (b) is unfit because of his bodily or mental condition;
    • (c) is outside the United Kingdom and it is not reasonably practicable to secure his attendance;
    • (d) cannot be found despite reasonably steps having been taken to find him
    • (e) does not which to give evidence through fear (this will require the leave of the court)

    s.117 (business/trade exceptions)
  8. What is the "safety valve" exception to hearsay?
    Where it is in the interest of justice to be admissible.

    Judicial exception under s. 114

What would you like to do?

Home > Flashcards > Print Preview