Evidence

What type of Identification procedure was used?

Eyewitness Identification, Image ID PARADE - PACE CODE D 3.4

1 of 36

Was the ID procedure properly carried out?

Yes, asked if the person he saw was in the picture and stated his number '6'

2 of 36

Is this a poor quality ID?

Fleeting glance as the suspect ran off but security light showed him in detail

3 of 36

Evidence to corroborate?

No

4 of 36

Should it be withdrawn from the jury?

Shouldn't be withdrawn, however, issues with fleeting glance - Turnball 1977

5 of 36

Turnball 1977

Confident W may be mistaken. W who is honest may be wrong. W who is convincing may be wrong.

6 of 36

What are the difficulties of ID?

Images could get photoshopped, e.g beard added on, video would have been more reliable. Errors with perception. Suggestive questions. Deliberate lies.

7 of 36

Silence and Adverse Inferences - s34 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994

Silence when questioned

8 of 36

Silence and Adverse Inferences - s35 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994

Not giving evidence

9 of 36

Silence and Adverse Inferences - s36 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994

Failure to account for specific items

10 of 36

Silence and Adverse Inferences - s37 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994

Failure to account for presence

11 of 36

Silence and Adverse Inferences - Under Art 6 ECHR

Must have access to legal advice(s34). Must be prima facie case. Jury must be directed reasons to silence. Conviction not wholly on silence.

12 of 36

Who is 'competent'? Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 s53

Anyone who can understand questions put to him as a witness, and give answers to them that can be understood.

13 of 36

Who can be compelled to testify?

Anyone who is competent. Main exclusions are defendant and their spouse. Can be fit to answer but not remember = unfit witness (CJA 2003 s116)

14 of 36

Hearsay

Out of court statement, e.g. messages or came from witness who is unavailable, purpose to cause other person to believe, offered in evidence to prove contents of the statement

15 of 36

Problems with hearsay

Unreliability as it is repeating something that has been said elsewhere and maker of statement can't be cross examined.

16 of 36

When is hearsay admissible? s114 CJA 2003

A) Falls within CJA 2003 or other statute. B) C/L preserved. C) Agree to admit by all parties D) Interests of justice

17 of 36

s114 A - CUCUMBAR

C) Confession made by D. U) Undisputed witness statements. C) Consistent and previous inconsistent statements. U) Unavailable witness. M) ... B) Business or other docs. A) Admissions. R) Reports by experts.

18 of 36

s114 B - PrivateInvestigator Cracker

PI) Public Info. C) Confessions. R) Resgestae. A) Agent admissions. C) Common enterprise. K) ... E) Expert opinion evidence R) Reputation RE character or family

19 of 36

s114 C - Agree by all parties

Admissible

20 of 36

s114 D - Craprodeo

C) Circumstance of making statement. R) Reliability of matter. A) And how important is statement? R) Reliability of circumstances when made. O) Oral evidence, can it be called? D) Difficulty challenging statement. E) Extent difficulty prejudices p O)

21 of 36

How is hearsay admissible?

A statement made out of proceedings adduced as evidence of matter stated.

22 of 36

What is a statement? s115 CJA 2003

Representation of fact or opinion made by a person by whatever means

23 of 36

Special measures YJ&CEA 99

Screening or live link. Available to under 18's, vulnerable adults and feared victims

24 of 36

Bad Character - s98 CJA 2003

Not admissible unless falls under s.101 'Gateways'

25 of 36

Gateway C

Important explanatory evidence

26 of 36

Gateway D

Important matter between D&P - Theft twice

27 of 36

Gateway G

D attacks another persons character - "you're trying to fit me up"

28 of 36

Grounds of unfairness? s101 CJA 2003

Could be adverse effect on fairness because of when previous convictions were.

29 of 36

Expert evidence

Type of opinion evidence, goes beyond facts. Must be relevant. Fingerprints. Small chance of challenging reliability if fingerprints are found.May corroborate other Ev.

30 of 36

Problem with expert

Leaves room for doubt in jury - Allam 2019

31 of 36

Are lies admissible?

If jury are sure: deliberate untruth, relates to issue,

32 of 36

Burden of Proof

Normally Prosecution

33 of 36

Standard of Proof

Prosecution to prove to jury beyond all reasonable doubt

34 of 36

Standard where defence has burden

"More likely than not"

35 of 36

Foundation facts

Before jury can draw inferences from silence they must be sure reason was that D had no answer to give

36 of 36

Get Revising

Evidence

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

Back

Card 3

Front

Back

Card 4

Front

Back

Card 5

Front

Back

Comments

Similar Law resources:

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

Back

Card 3

Front

Back

Card 4

Front

Back

Card 5

Front

Back

Comments

Related discussions on The Student Room

Similar Law resources: