Evidence gained by "trickery"

HideShow resource information
2 examples of such "trickery"
Eavesdropping + spying, agent provocateurs
1 of 11
Which commentator said that cases have lowered standards of vigilance against abuses of CJS (under eavesdropping + spying)
O'Connor
2 of 11
Why did court in Grant disapprove of police's eavesdropping on conversation between prisoners + lawyers?
Seriously undermine rule of law (justifies stay due to abuse of process)
3 of 11
Which case disapproved of Grant? And why?
Warren v AG for Jersey: D was charged with a v serious crime, and misconduct didn't cause any prejudice to D
4 of 11
Which 2 interests did court need to balance in Warren?
(1) public interest in ensuring those accused of serious crimes were tried, (2) executive misconduct didn't bring CJS into disrepute
5 of 11
What were the 4 reasons for Portugal's condemnation in Teixeira de Castro?
(1) no judicial supervision of police activity, (2) no reason to suspect D, (3) police activity caused D to commit offence D wasn't in the habit of committing, (4) no other evidence against D
6 of 11
What did ECtHR draw a distinction between in Teixeira?
Covert crime investigation (permissible) + positive instigation of offences (as was the case here)
7 of 11
What did Loosely say was the test for entrapment?
Whether police's law enforcement methods were part of bona fide investigation
8 of 11
What did Moore say was the key question in entrapment cases? (according with distinction made in Teixeria)?
Did police cause D to commit offence? Or did police provide D with a chance to act in a way D would've done had business been proposed by someone else?
9 of 11
Which 2 cases (by same name) was evidence produced by entrapment admissible?
Jones (police = pretend cannabis buyer + child (in response to public toilet notice asking for children to have sex))
10 of 11
Will evidence improperly obtained by non-police (e.g. private citizens) be admissible?
Yes: Rosenberg (film taken by CCTV camera on a neighbour's property, directed into someone's home)
11 of 11

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

O'Connor

Back

Which commentator said that cases have lowered standards of vigilance against abuses of CJS (under eavesdropping + spying)

Card 3

Front

Seriously undermine rule of law (justifies stay due to abuse of process)

Back

Preview of the back of card 3

Card 4

Front

Warren v AG for Jersey: D was charged with a v serious crime, and misconduct didn't cause any prejudice to D

Back

Preview of the back of card 4

Card 5

Front

(1) public interest in ensuring those accused of serious crimes were tried, (2) executive misconduct didn't bring CJS into disrepute

Back

Preview of the back of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Criminal Procedure and Criminal Evidence resources »