• Home
    display
  • Main homepage
Keeping pace with changing times


    Evidence

    See also Police Procedure

    Note: A case may explain points other than the one shown
    Document Currently In Force A and another v Inner South London Coroner 2004
    Police officers permitted to remain anonymous during coroners inquest
    Document Currently In Force A and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department 2005
    Evidence obtained by torture is inadmissible
    Document Currently In Force Ahmed v DPP 1997
    Witness to give evidence identifying vehicle involved
    Document Currently In Force Attorney - General's Reference (No 1 of 2004) 2004
    Reversal of the burden on proof does not necessarily contravene Article 6 ECHR.
    Document Currently In Force Brett v DPP 2009
    Guidance on the admissibility of analysis certificates - driving OPL
    Document Currently In Force Brotherston and others v DPP 2012
    Interpretation of the words 'of a description specified' and 'of a type approved by the Secretary of State' within the meaning of section 20 RTOA 1988
    Document Currently In Force Burwell v DPP 2009
    Guidance on use of a certificate under section 11 of the Computer Misuse Act 1990
    Document Currently In Force CC of Cumbria v Wright and another 2006
    Guidance on the requirements of the court in order for a closure order to be issued
    Document Currently In Force CC of West Mercia Police v Boorman 2005
    Evidence older than 6 months is admissible in ASBO applications
    Document Currently In Force Clay v Clerk to the South Cambridgeshire Justices 2014
    A police decision not to retain a car involved in a RTC , did not impact unfairly on the proceedings and there was no suggestion of bad faith
    Document Currently In Force Davies v HSE 2002
    Reversal of burden of truth is justified, necessary and proportionate.
    Document Currently In Force DPP v Baker 2004
    Harassment - Conduct occurring outside 6 month limitation period
    Document Currently In Force DPP v Barker 2004
    Burden on driver to prove he had provisional licence and was complying with conditions of that licence
    Document Currently In Force DPP v Chand 2007
    Previous convictions must be similar in nature to show propensity
    Document Currently In Force DPP v Kavanagh 2005
    Adverse inferences from silence
    Document Currently In Force DPP v Mooney 1996
    Requirements for sufficient proof of disqualification from driving includes convincing evidence
    Document Currently In Force DPP v Santa-Bermudez 2003
    Creating danger/recklessness and actus reus for assault occasioning actual bodily harm.
    Document Currently In Force DPP v Thornley 2006
    Record from device can be admitted as evidence without need for witness to prove it
    Document Currently In Force Ellis v Jones 1973
    A properly admitted section 9 CJA 1967 statement is the same as if the evidence was given in the witness box
    Document Currently In Force Gilchrist v HM Advocate; Quinn v HM Advocate 2004
    Evidence may be admissible where authorisation for directed surveillance is invalid
    Document Currently In Force H v DPP 2007
    Not necessary to identify which particular injury was caused by which particular assailant.
    Document Currently In Force Hasani v Blackfriars Crown Court 2005
    Procedure where defendant deemed unfit to plead but then found to be fit.
    Document Currently In Force Hipgrave and another v Jones 2004
    Civil standard of proof applies to injunction applications.
    Document Currently In Force Kensington International Ltd v Congo and Others 2007
    Guidance on several aspects of section 13 of the Fraud Act 2006/Incrimination defence not available in bribery
    Document Currently In Force Lloyd v DPP 1995
    Must be supporting evidence for inferences to be drawn from silence
    Document Currently In Force London Borough of Lambeth v S, C, V, J and others 2006
    DNA taken under section 64 PACE CANNOT be used for paternity testing
    Document Currently In Force M v DPP 2007
    Hearsay evidence can sometimes be admitted without a formal notice.
    Document Currently In Force Maher v DPP 2006
    Police Incident Log entry is admissible as hearsay evidence.
    Document Currently In Force Malcolm v DPP 2007
    Further evidence may be submitted after court verdict in special circumstances
    Document Currently In Force Marsh v DPP 2006
    Discretion to exclude evidence where PACE code breached not always required.
    Document Currently In Force Mathisen v Norway 2006
    Co-accused is still a witness and so falls within the provisions of Article 6
    Document Currently In Force McEwan v DPP 2007
    Justices' error allowing a core witness statement to be read out in court
    Document Currently In Force Mills v DPP 2008
    Prosecution must prove any alleged disqualification
    Document Currently In Force Morris v DPP 2008
    No automatic requirement to retain CCTV evidence where it potentially recorded a fact in issue.
    Document Currently In Force Murray v DPP 1996
    Evidence of weighbridge readings by police officer
    Document Currently In Force Nicol and Selvanayagam v DPP 1995
    Guidance on conduct that is capable of amounting to a breach of the peace
    Document Currently In Force Pattison v DPP 2005
    Proving identity through consistency of details.
    Document Currently In Force Prosecution Appeal (No 1 of 2009); R v B 2009
    Admission of hearsay where victim out of jurisdiction
    Document Currently In Force R (on the application of Bull) v Northampton Justices 2009
    Importance of clarifying issues in a given case.
    Document Currently In Force R (on the application of Cleary) v Highbury Corner Magistrates' Court and others 2006
    Closure Order hearings could be adjourned if full disclosure had not taken place and hearsay evidence should not be used routinely
    Document Currently In Force R (on the application of CPS) v Sedgemoor Justices 2007
    Admissibility of evidence from authorised or unauthorised analysts.
    Document Currently In Force R (on the application of CPS) v Sedgemoor Magistrates Court 2007
    The admission of expert evidence regarding blood/breath analysis in drink/drive cases.
    Document Currently In Force R (on the application of Firth) v Epping Magistrates Court 2011
    Case progression form is admissible as evidence
    Document Currently In Force R (on the application of Gleadall) v Huddersfield Magistrates Court 2005
    Guidance into the duty of the prosecution/police to investigate the character of witnesses used.
    Document Currently In Force R (on the application of Gonzales) v Folkstone Magistrates' Court 2010
    Issues relating to the admission of mixed exculpatory statement as evidence in offence of assault
    Document Currently In Force R (on the application of Hilton) v Canterbury Crown Court 2009
    Court must consider defence / properly consider / distinguish whether knife in possession and whether good reason for it being there
    Document Currently In Force R (on the application of Kent Pharmaceuticals) v Director of the Serious Fraud Office 2004
    Section 3(5) discretion should always be exercised reasonably and in good faith
    Document Currently In Force R (on the application of Meredith) v Harwich Justices 2006
    What evidence is necessary to show unfitness to give evidence under section 116 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003.
    Document Currently In Force R (on the application of Paul & Ritz Hotel Ltd) v Assistant Deputy Coroner of Inner West London 2007
    Coroner cannot read hearsay to a jury where the witness is unable to attend court.
    Document Currently In Force R (on the application of Robinson) v Sutton Coldfield Magistrates Court 2006
    Courts consideration regarding frightened witnesses
    Document Currently In Force R (on the application of the CPS) v Uxbridge Magistrates Court 2007
    Failure to differentiate between a section 116 hearsay application and an application for adjournment is wrong in law.
    Document Currently In Force R (on the application of the DPP) v Chorley Magistrates Court and another 2006
    Effect of failure to serve properly a certificate of analysis in respect of drink/drive offence
    Document Currently In Force R (on the application of Thomas) v Greenwich Magistrates' Court 2009
    Bail proceedings are not the same as criminal proceedings in respect of evidential rules
    Document Currently In Force R (on the application of Tolhurst) v CPS 2008
    Prosecution not changing charge regarding child under 13 not perverse
    Document Currently In Force R (on the application of W) v Acton Youth Court 2005
    Admissibility of hearsay evidence
    Document Currently In Force R v Cooper 2010
    Business records compiled by one person does not give the independence of corroboration required for perjury
    Document Currently In Force R v Weir; R v De Qun He; R v Hong Qiang He; R v Manister; R v Somanathan; R v Yaxley-Lennon 2005
    Guidance on the bad character provisions of the Criminal Justice Act 2003
    Document Currently In Force R v A (2001) also known as R v A(2) or R v sub nom R v Y (2001) 2001
    Restrictions on evidence - sexual offence proceedings - Youth Justice
    Document Currently In Force R v A 2008
    'New and compelling evidence' need not relate directly to the allegation.
    Document Currently In Force R v Abbas and another 2010
    To use inferences against a defendant for object/substance/marks etc. It cannot be found in someone else's possession/clothing
    Document Currently In Force R v Adams 2007
    Where there was doubt that a witness would receive a voicemail and act upon it a visit to the witnesses home and/or place of work should be made.
    Document Currently In Force R v Adenusi 2006
    Misconduct occurring subsequent to charge can be used to show propensity
    Document Currently In Force R v Ainscough 2006
    Reliance cannot be put solely on a PNC report for previous convictions.
    Document Currently In Force R v Ali and Others 2001
    Guidance on the drawing of adverse inferences from silence where done so on solicitors advice and how the jury should draw those inferences at trial.
    Document Currently In Force R v Al-Khawaja 2005
    Trial fair when statement of deceased witness read in court
    Document Currently In Force R v AM 2009
    Questioning on previous allegation of rape is not on past sexual experience
    Document Currently In Force R v Arnold 2004
    Witness statement admissible as documentary hearsay - frightened witnesses
    Document Currently In Force R v Assani 2008
    Guidance on submitting evidence under gateways (e), (f) or (g)
    Document Currently In Force R v Athwal (Bachan) and Athwal (Sukhdave) 2009
    Hearsay concept in relation to evidence given to rebut the fabrication of a story
    Document Currently In Force R v B(J) 2009
    Fresh evidence of co-defendant was NOT compelling new evidence when raised after the first trial.
    Document Currently In Force R v B 2010
    A child of 4 is capable of being a competent witness
    Document Currently In Force R v B 2012
    Evidence which had been available to be used at trial, but which had not been used, could be 'new' evidence for the purposes of section 78(2) CJA 2003
    Document Currently In Force R v Bailey 2008
    Evidence of confession in chatroom/video recorded evidence did not render trial unfair.
    Document Currently In Force R v Bains 2010
    Texts merely used to show a pattern of drug dealing are not inadmissible evidence (where the truth of the contents is not at issue)
    Document Currently In Force R v Beckford 1994
    Vehicles should not be scrapped without express permission of the police
    Document Currently In Force R v Becouarn 2005
    Adverse inferences from defendant not giving evidence to avoid jury learning of previous convictions
    Document Currently In Force R v Benguit 2005
    Retrial after a jury's failure to agree and bad character evidence
    Document Currently In Force R v Blake 2006
    Further guidance on the use of bad character evidence
    Document Currently In Force R v Blythe 2007
    Age relevant to status of sex offence / video should not be re-viewed by jury
    Document Currently In Force R v Bovell, R v Dowds 2005
    Admissibility of bad character evidence
    Document Currently In Force R v Bowers and Others 1998
    No inference should be drawn where facts not relied on at trial.
    Document Currently In Force R v Bowman 2006
    Guidance on the use of expert witnesses and the content of their reports.
    Document Currently In Force R V Bradley 2005
    New provisions of Criminal Justice Act 2003 applicable to all criminal proceedings.
    Document Currently In Force R v Braithwaite 2010
    Unsubstantiated allegations of wrong doing in a crime report should not be produced before a court as evidence of bad character as they are unlikely to be of probative value
    Document Currently In Force R v Brewster and Cromwell 2010
    With proper guidance a jury can be trusted to make a proper assessment of relevant bad character evidence that is worthy of consideration
    Document Currently In Force R v Brima 2006
    Bad character evidence admissible on a charge of murder based on identification evidence.
    Document Currently In Force R v Brizzalari 2004
    Guidance on when section 34 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 should be used.
    Document Currently In Force R v Bullen 2008
    Evidence of propensity must go to an important matter in issue between the defence and prosecution.
    Document Currently In Force R v Bullen 2008
    Test for admission of bad character evidence remains that of relevance to an important matter in issue between the parties
    Document Currently In Force R v Burns 2006
    Proof of identity from the memorandum of conviction
    Document Currently In Force R v Burrage or R v B (RA) 1997
    Evidence of sexual preference may be inadmissible
    Document Currently In Force R v Burton 2011
    In a trial for an offence of sexual activity with a child, a judge had not erred in admitting hearsay evidence relating to a conversation between a police officer and a reluctant 14-year-old witness
    Document Currently In Force R v C : R v H 2004
    Appointment of special independent counsel and points to consider in public interest immunity hearings.
    Document Currently In Force R v C and K 2006
    What is reasonably required for section 116 Criminal Justice Act 2003 to operate.
    Document Currently In Force R v C: R v B 2003
    Where evidence of identity is based on hearsay it is safe evidence if that recognition is repeated many times.
    Document Currently In Force R v C 2006
    Guidance on contaminated bad character evidence
    Document Currently In Force R v C 2007
    Protection from cross examination for witnesses in sexual offences where offences committed before, but the trial after, the commencement of the CJA 2003
    Document Currently In Force R v Cambridge 2011
    Evidence to show propensity and motive to to carry a gun was admissible in a trial where the only other evidence was DNA on the gun itself
    Document Currently In Force R v Campbell and others 2009
    Issues of causation and joint enterprise where an attack had two phases a short time apart
    Document Currently In Force R v Campbell 2006
    Not unfair to admit bad character evidence in a re-trial.
    Document Currently In Force R v Campbell 2007
    Bad character evidence not confined to the gateway through which it is admitted.
    Document Currently In Force R v Cannings 2004
    Disagreement between eminent experts can make proceeding with prosecution unwise.
    Document Currently In Force R v Card 2006
    Guidance on how section 107 CJA 2003 regarding contaminated evidence should operate
    Document Currently In Force R v Carrington 1993
    Where memory of a business record is incomplete
    Document Currently In Force R v Chambers 2008
    Duty to put correct and current law before the court
    Document Currently In Force R v Chaproniere 2007
    Judge had not wrongly put the prosecution case to the jury.
    Document Currently In Force R v Charisma 2009
    If defendant suffered memory loss he could still give evidence to explain the problem rather than stay silent
    Document Currently In Force R v Charles 2009
    Prosecution to prove breach without reasonable excuse
    Document Currently In Force R v Chopra 2006
    Uses to which evidence from several complainants can properly be put.
    Document Currently In Force R v Chrysostomou 2010
    Possible evidence of bad character that had no relevance to the case other than to malign a defendant should not be allowed
    Document Currently In Force R v Ciccarelli 2011
    In a case of sexual assault: the question of whether a defendant had a reasonable belief that the complainant had consented would not arise unless there was sufficient evidence to show that belief was reasonable
    Document Currently In Force R v Clare and Peach 1995
    PC was 'expert' witness after viewing video repeatedly
    Document Currently In Force R v Clarke (Trevor) 2011
    Bad character evidence where the defendant has made an attack on another person's character
    Document Currently In Force R v Clipston 2011
    The use of hearsay evidence in confiscation proceedings
    Document Currently In Force R v Coates 2007
    Issues surrounding a series of inconsistent statements by a complainant
    Document Currently In Force R v Cole, R v Keet 2007
    Article 6 did not preclude hearsay evidence even where it is the sole or decisive evidence as to guilt.
    Document Currently In Force R v Comley 2007
    Defects in evidence of sexual activity from young witnesses at trial will not necessarily render it unreliable.
    Document Currently In Force R v Coutts-Jarman 2001
    Guidance on operations involving test purchases from drug users with convictions.
    Document Currently In Force R v D and others 2011
    Where a defendant was charged with sexual offences against children, possession of child pornography was admissible as bad character evidence under gateway (d), depending on the facts, as demonstrating a sexual interest in a child
    Document Currently In Force R v D 2008
    Guidance on admitting evidence under gateway (c) of section 101 Criminal Justice Act 2003
    Document Currently In Force R v Daniel 1998
    Solicitor's advice on a 'no comment' interview could be admissible to rebut recent fabrication.
    Document Currently In Force R v Davies 2006
    A judge does not need to test a witness in person to decide she does not have to give evidence and her statement can be read in court
    Document Currently In Force R v Davis, Ellis, Gregory, Simms, Martin 2006
    Anonymity of witnesses is not prejudicial to a fair trial.
    Document Currently In Force R v Davis 2008
    Use of special measures can render a trial unfair
    Document Currently In Force R v Delay 2006
    Challenging a witness's mental status can mean that bad character evidence is given at court
    Document Currently In Force R v Derodra 1999
    The maker is the person supplying the information
    Document Currently In Force R v Dervish 2001
    Flat denial can rule out any claim of entrapment/Guidance on balancing fair trial with public interest/inferences can be drawn from inadmissible interviews
    Document Currently In Force R v Derwentside Justices, ex parte Swift; R v Sunderland Justices ex parte Bate 1995
    Proof that person disqualified and person charged with disqualified driving are one and the same
    Document Currently In Force R v Doheny 1996
    DNA evidence guidelines
    Document Currently In Force R v Doherty 2006
    Meaning of 'fear' for the purposes of admitting evidence under section 116 Criminal justice Act 2003
    Document Currently In Force R v Dossett 2013
    It had been open to a judge to conclude that a suspect's previous convictions for offences that occurred in similar circumstances to the instant case, were admissible as they could demonstrate a propensity to behave in the manner alleged
    Document Currently In Force R v Downer 2009
    Co-defendant's pleas must be for the same offence as that alleged
    Document Currently In Force R v DT 2009
    Evidence must be given of the steps taken to locate the witness in an application to admit evidence as hearsay.
    Document Currently In Force R v E 2004
    Guidance on what amounts to an 'interception' under RIPA.
    Document Currently In Force R v E 2006
    Admissibility of evidence where the witness is unavailable.
    Document Currently In Force R v ED 2010
    Hearsay evidence provisions cannot normally be used to circumvent the attendance at court of a reluctant victim
    Document Currently In Force R v Edwards and Others 2004
    Compatibility of the right to a fair trial and reversed burdens of proof.
    Document Currently In Force R v Edwards and Rowlands 2005
    Bad Character - lawful possession of a firearm/co-defendants
    Document Currently In Force R v Edwards, R v Rowlands, R v Mclean, R v Smith, R v Enright and Gray 2005
    Court of Appeal observations regarding evidence of bad character
    Document Currently In Force R v Enright and Gray 2005
    Relevance may vary but once admitted through any gateway evidence may be used for any relevant purpose
    Document Currently In Force R v Erskinne: R v Williams 2009
    Requirements for admission of fresh evidence
    Document Currently In Force R v Esimu 2007
    Explanations can amount to facts relied upon in defence.
    Document Currently In Force R v F 2005
    Showing video/photos in absence of victim does not contravene section 41 Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 if crucial to central issue.
    Document Currently In Force R v Faraz 2012
    For an offence of dissemination of terrorist publications, it was wrong for the prosecution to adduce in evidence the possession by named terrorist offenders of material similar or identical to that disseminated by the defendant.
    Document Currently In Force R v Finch 2007
    Guidance on the admission of evidence under section 76A of PACE and section 114 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 regarding reluctant witnesses.
    Document Currently In Force R v Ford 2010
    No legal power to admit anonymous hearsay evidence in criminal proceedings
    Document Currently In Force R v Foxley 1995
    Confusion between hearsay & direct documentary evidence
    Document Currently In Force R v Freeman and R v Crawford 2008
    Evidence from one offence on an indictment may be used to support another offence on the same indictment
    Document Currently In Force R v Friend 1996
    Mental age of young person may be an issue
    Document Currently In Force R v Gadsby 2005
    Admissibility of relevant evidence of propensity.
    Document Currently In Force R v Garaxo 2005
    Cross-examination on previous complaints permissible.
    Document Currently In Force R v Gayle 1998
    Inferences should not be drawn where a defence is raised but questions are not answered adequately.
    Document Currently In Force R v George 2006
    Guidance on the use of gateway (g)
    Document Currently In Force R v Giga 2007
    Circumstances where a Turnbull Direction regarding identification was necessary
    Document Currently In Force R v Gordon / R v Grant 1994
    What evidence is likely to be relevant to the offence
    Document Currently In Force R v Greenwood 2004
    Evidence suggesting that another may be guilty should not be excluded.
    Document Currently In Force R v H (JR) (childhood amnesia) 2005
    Reliability of evidence from memory when child is under 7at time of abuse
    Document Currently In Force R v H 1995
    Collusion will not normally affect the admissibility of evidence but rather its weight.
    Document Currently In Force R v Hackett 2011
    Whilst a judge had erred in giving both a direction under section 34 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 and a Lucas direction, the conviction was safe
    Document Currently In Force R v Haigh 2010
    Where relevant background evidence of bad character is admissible
    Document Currently In Force R v Hall 2000
    Criteria for using expert to show confession unreliable
    Document Currently In Force R v Hamer 2010
    A PND is not an admission of guilt and should not be read out in court as evidence of bad character unless there are circumstances of direct relevance to the case
    Document Currently In Force R v Hanson 2005
    Bad Character - Admissibility - Guidance
    Document Currently In Force R v Harrison 2004
    Admission of similar fact evidence in murder cases.
    Document Currently In Force R v Hayter 2005
    Out of court confessions/Co-accused
    Document Currently In Force R v Hearne 2009
    Using evidence of previous convictions where defendant has attacked another person's character
    Document Currently In Force R v Hedge and Beaumont 2010
    The admission of 6 year old convictions in a case with other evidence and the avoidance of asking a leading question during video identification
    Document Currently In Force R v Hepburn / R v H 1994
    Collusion will nullify corroboration
    Document Currently In Force R v Highton, R v Van Nguyen, R v Carp 2005
    bad character - evidence of a propensity to commit offences of the kind charged
    Document Currently In Force R v Hodgson (David John) 2001
    Evidence of number of visitors for short periods to a property may be evidence to infer drug dealing is taking place
    Document Currently In Force R v Hogan 1996
    May be possible to produce custody record under this rule
    Document Currently In Force R v Holland, R v Case 2003
    Non-disclosure of informants names will not affect the safety of a conviction.
    Document Currently In Force R v Holmes 2014
    Problems with identification evidence where suspect picked for identification parade due to being a man with previous convictions who lived in the area
    Document Currently In Force R v Horncastle and Others 2009
    Provided hearsay evidence can be reliably tested or assessed there is no breach of article 6.
    Document Currently In Force R v Howell 2003
    Soundly based objective reason required for silence at interviews to prevent adverse inference being drawn at trial.
    Document Currently In Force R v Humphries 2005
    Hearsay and previous convictions
    Document Currently In Force R v Hunt 1986
    Prosecution must prove could not be lawful possession under Misuse of Drugs Regs
    Document Currently In Force R v Hutchison 2008
    No time limit on offences used to show propensity.
    Document Currently In Force R v Ilomuanya 2005
    Admissibility of documentary evidence to prove knowledge.
    Document Currently In Force R v Imran: R v Hussain 1997
    Jury allowed to re examine previously seen video after retirement but should do so in open court
    Document Currently In Force R v Ioannou 1998
    Interviewing or investigating officers must be able to make an informed decision as to whether to charge before charge is made.
    Document Currently In Force R v Isichei 2006
    The use of evidence under sections 101, 114 and 115 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003
    Document Currently In Force R v J (S) 2009
    Section 114 designed for instances where witness is deemed not a competent witness
    Document Currently In Force R v J 2003
    A conviction for manslaughter was unsafe where the defendant who was a vulnerable adult, made a confession without an appropriate adult present
    Document Currently In Force R v James 2000
    Guidance on admission of fresh evidence on appeal following conviction.
    Document Currently In Force R v Johnson and Others 2009
    Previous convictions admissible to show propensity to conspire
    Document Currently In Force R v K 2006
    Jury test for the admissibility of recorded child evidence
    Document Currently In Force R v K 2007
    Guidance on the admission of evidence in domestic violence cases.
    Document Currently In Force R v Kamuhuza 2008
    Provisions of sections 116 and 117 Criminal Justice Act 2003 must be satisfied.
    Document Currently In Force R v Kearley 1992
    Hearsay evidence will not prove intent
    Document Currently In Force R v Keenan 1989
    Exclusion of evidence gained through substantial/significant breach of PACE Codes.
    Document Currently In Force R v Kempster 2008
    Guidance on the use of ear prints as evidence.
    Document Currently In Force R v Kennedy 1998
    No entrapment where answers freely given or could be challenged/no appeal against conviction after guilty plea
    Document Currently In Force R v Kevin John Johnson 1994
    All similarities/dissimilarities taken into account
    Document Currently In Force R v Khan (Sultan) 2000
    A bug on a house may produce admissible evidence
    Document Currently In Force R v Khan 2008
    Judge does not have to put provocation to jury even where shown to present by facts of the case.
    Document Currently In Force R v King 2008
    30 year delay to complain did not amount to an abuse of process where previous conviction admitted to show propensity.
    Document Currently In Force R v Knight 2003
    Drawing of adverse inferences where questions not answered in interview but prepared statement used.
    Document Currently In Force R v L 2008
    Wife's statement can be admitted in evidence.
    Document Currently In Force R v Labastide 2008
    Evidence that amounts to a speculative exercise is not admissible
    Document Currently In Force R v Lamaletie: Royce 2008
    When full details of previous convictions are required for bad character evidence
    Document Currently In Force R v Lawson (Raymond) 1998
    Example of when a dying declaration may be valid
    Document Currently In Force R v Lawson 2006
    Guidance on the use of bad character evidence to establish propensity to truthfulness.
    Document Currently In Force R v Leonard 2009
    Text messages were inadmissible hearsay evidence and not evidence of bad character
    Document Currently In Force R v Lewendon 2006
    Proof of identity through reliance on memoranda of conviction determinable solely by trial judge.
    Document Currently In Force R v Linwood (Kenneth Brian) 1995
    police letter to judge to obtain a reduction in sentence
    Document Currently In Force R v Lockwood 2003
    Unacceptable level of circumstantial evidence for a conviction
    Document Currently In Force R v Loosely 2001
    Attorney General's reference relating to the law concerning entrapment
    Document Currently In Force R v Luttrell; R v Dawson and Hamberger 2004
    Lip reading from CCTV footage is 'real evidence' but should carry a special warning
    Document Currently In Force R v Lynch 2007
    Admissibility of statements under section 114 Criminal Justice Act 2003
    Document Currently In Force R v M 2006
    Capability of aged previous convictions being sufficient to prove propensity.
    Document Currently In Force R v M 2008
    Judge can rule a witness as not being competent prior to hearing evidence.
    Document Currently In Force R v Machado 2006
    Evidence of taking/offering drugs not bad character evidence when relating to facts of the case.
    Document Currently In Force R v MacPherson 2005
    Guidance on assessing the competence of child witnesses.
    Document Currently In Force R v Maginnis 1987
    Giving drugs back to the owner can be 'supplying'
    Document Currently In Force R v Maguire 2008
    Prosecutors, advocates and judges to be dissuaded from over formalising common sense in section 34 directions.
    Document Currently In Force R v Mahmood and another 2013
    A prison policy of blanket interception and recording of prisoners' phone calls was not a breach of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000
    Document Currently In Force R v Manchester Crown Court Ex Parte McCann and Others 2002
    Guidance on evidence and proof in proceedings for ASBOs
    Document Currently In Force R v Marsh 2008
    Reliability of witness making an assertion in connection with the admissibility of hearsay evidence
    Document Currently In Force R v Mawji 2003
    Where oral evidence can be given e-mail will not necessarily be hearsay.
    Document Currently In Force R v Mayers and others; R v P and others 2008
    Guidance from the Court on witness anonymity orders
    Document Currently In Force R v McAllister 2008
    Admission of evidence of alleged offence having an adverse effect on the proceedings.
    Document Currently In Force R v McEwan 2011
    The fact that a defendant had entered an equivocal plea did not affect the fact that he had pleaded guilty and that he was therefore a competent witness
    Document Currently In Force R v McGuinness 1998
    Guidance on the admissibility of interview evidence and adverse inferences.
    Document Currently In Force R v McKenzie 2008
    Admissibility of bad character evidence from memories
    Document Currently In Force R v McLean, R v Paine, R v Harris 2007
    Guidance on the admission of statements said to the police that can be regarded as hearsay
    Document Currently In Force R v McLean 2005
    Test for admission through section 101 gateways (d) and (e)
    Document Currently In Force R v Middlesex Guildhall Crown Court 2004
    Evidence of specific agreement, separate from trial issues, legal privilege protection removed
    Document Currently In Force R v Miell 2007
    Perjury admission is not compelling evidence of murder.
    Document Currently In Force R v Momodou 2005
    Witness training is prohibited for criminal trials but pre-trial familiarisation allowed.
    Document Currently In Force R v MPC ex parte Thompson 1997
    Caution to be considered only after offence admitted
    Document Currently In Force R v Mullings 2010
    Whether letters sent to a defendant after the event could be evidence of bad character in relation to an offence
    Document Currently In Force R v N (K) 2006
    Diary entries admissible evidence but not hearsay due to not being made with the intent of causing another to believe their content.
    Document Currently In Force R v Nadiri 1995
    Knowledge of importation must be proved if denied
    Document Currently In Force R v Navabi and R v Embaye 2005
    Burden of proof for s2(4) defence is legal, not evidential
    Document Currently In Force R v Nelson 2006
    An attack on a non-witness's character could allow defendant's bad character to be put before the jury
    Document Currently In Force R v Newell 2012
    A statement by counsel in a plea and case management hearing form was admissible at trial but should have been excluded under section 78 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984
    Document Currently In Force R v Ngyuen (Thu Van) 2008
    Untried previous offences can be evidence of propensity
    Document Currently In Force R v Nudds 2008
    Confessions made to cell mates are admissible as evidence.
    Document Currently In Force R v O 2006
    Interpretation of the provisions in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 creating the criteria for the use of hearsay evidence in trials
    Document Currently In Force R v O'Connell 2003
    Problems when a suspect only hears one half of a phone conversation
    Document Currently In Force R v Osbourne 2007
    Shouting not reprehensible behaviour for bad character provisions
    Document Currently In Force R v P and others 2002
    Use of intercepted telephone conversations from different jurisdictions
    Document Currently In Force R v P: R v Blackburn 2007
    Guidance - sections 71-75 SOCAP - Reviewing sentence where offender assists in an investigation.
    Document Currently In Force R v Parker 2006
    Court records are sufficient as proof of a fact in issue in proceedings
    Document Currently In Force R v Patel 2004
    Incidents must be so connected in type and context that they amount to a course of conduct
    Document Currently In Force R v Peterborough Magistrates Court ex parte Willis and Amos 1987
    Justices must inquire into nature of potential witness's evidence prior to issuing witness summons
    Document Currently In Force R v Petkar, R v Farquhar 2003
    Guidance on the direction that should be given in cases involving the application of section 34 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994.
    Document Currently In Force R v Pieterson and Holloway 1994
    Evidence of training and performance must be available
    Document Currently In Force R v Piggott 1994
    duty on prosecution to affirm/refute contents
    Document Currently In Force R v Pleydell 2005
    Admissibility of evidence that the defendant had taken cocaine
    Document Currently In Force R v Pointer 1997
    Guidance on what constitutes an interview/ Guidance on the application of drawing adverse inferences from silence.
    Document Currently In Force R v Powell 2006
    Where the case relies on evidence of a young child the interview and trial should take place soon after the event.
    Document Currently In Force R v R 2008
    Power of Crown Court to make special measures directions
    Document Currently In Force R v R 2010
    Whether evidence ought to be excluded where child witness has no independent recollection of events
    Document Currently In Force R v Renda 2005
    Practical Guidance on bad character provision in set scenarios
    Document Currently In Force R v Richard Roy Allan 2004
    Judge to give proper direction re adverse inference
    Document Currently In Force R v Richards 2010
    The burden to defeat a 'reasonable excuse' defence lies with the prosecution
    Document Currently In Force R v Robert Paul Lee 1996
    Child witness need not be victim of assault/threat
    Document Currently In Force R v Roberts 1998
    Changing statement in good faith when video shows recollection to be wrong
    Document Currently In Force R v Robinson 2005
    Test for admissibility of evidence
    Document Currently In Force R v Rosenberg 2006
    Use of CCTV recorded by others than the police not in breach of RIPA/Human Rights/PACE
    Document Currently In Force R v Rothwell 1993
    Second hand knowledge of drug users is hearsay
    Document Currently In Force R v Ruth Lucas 1981
    Judge's direction in relation to corroboration value of accomplice's evidence
    Document Currently In Force R v S (also cited as Spooner v R) 2004
    Allowing inconsistent evidence of recent complaint in sexual offence
    Document Currently In Force R v S Ribble Mag Ct ex parte Cochrane 1996
    When statement may be used to help witness giving evidence
    Document Currently In Force R v S 2006
    Importance of basing a section 100 application on the correct issue.
    Document Currently In Force R v Sadiq and another 2009
    A severely disabled victim who refused to give evidence at a retrial may possibly have his original evidence and cross examination put to the jury
    Document Currently In Force R v Sang 1980
    Court not concerned with exclusion of evidence obtained by entrapment.
    Document Currently In Force R v Sed 2004
    Relevance of competency in determining admissiblity of documentary hearsay
    Document Currently In Force R v Sellick 2005
    Statement of intimidated witness allowed to be read out in court
    Document Currently In Force R v Sidhu 1992
    Admissibility of video evidence tending to prove relevance to purpose/object of alleged conspiracy
    Document Currently In Force R v Singh 2006
    Hearsay - admissibility of implied assertions (mobile phone records)
    Document Currently In Force R v Skinner / R v Arif 1993
    Conferring or rehearsing evidence is wrong
    Document Currently In Force R v Skinner 2005
    Material automatically copied from one website to another can be real evidence.
    Document Currently In Force R v Smart and another 2002
    Unnecessary for evidence of a conspiracy to be specific to a particular drug - silence in interview
    Document Currently In Force R v Smith (Matthew) 2004
    Non-disclosure can make a conviction unsafe despite a guilty plea
    Document Currently In Force R v Smith 2005
    Evidence of allegations that have not been tried can be admissible.
    Document Currently In Force R v Smith 2006
    Details of previous convictions can be admitted
    Document Currently In Force R v Sofroniou 2009
    Guidance on the preserved common law hearsay rule relating to common enterprise / effect of fresh evidence
    Document Currently In Force R v Soroya 2006
    The operation of section 41 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 did not adversely affect a defendant in a rape case.
    Document Currently In Force R v Sparks 1990
    Informal conversations
    Document Currently In Force R v Stallard 2000
    All relevant CCTV tapes should be retained.
    Document Currently In Force R v Stamford 1972
    What is indecent is for the jury to decide witnesses should not be called to persuade them
    Document Currently In Force R v Stevie O 2005
    Relevant considerations regarding prejudicial statements.
    Document Currently In Force R v Swinbourne 2013
    Rape convictions of a defendant with severe learning difficulties who was unfit to plead were safe, notwithstanding the fact that an extract of the defendant's police interview had been wrongly admitted as evidence.
    Document Currently In Force R v T (Tinsley) 2006
    Issues with hearsay evidence/conviction details being used to support a witness's credibility
    Document Currently In Force R v T 2004
    Complainant may be cross examined if behaviour strikingly similar
    Document Currently In Force R v Tahery 2006
    Admissibility of witness statements where witness is in fear
    Document Currently In Force R v Taylor 2006
    Factors a judge should consider and the method of doing so to admit hearsay evidence under section 114
    Document Currently In Force R v Tilambala 2005
    Cross examination - rape/sexual behaviour - irrelevant questions
    Document Currently In Force R v Tindle 2011
    Reasonable steps to trace witness must be taken before s114 is used
    Document Currently In Force R v Tirnaveanu 2007
    Guidance on the admission of evidence of previous misconduct.
    Document Currently In Force R v Toothill 1998
    Knocking on the door could be enough for some attempted burglaries
    Document Currently In Force R v Tully and Another 2006
    The greater the similarity between offences the greater the probative value.
    Document Currently In Force R v Turbill and another 2013
    In an offence of ill treatment of a person who lacks capacity, neglect has to be wilful to be sufficient for a criminal charge
    Document Currently In Force R v Turnbull and another 1976
    Turnbull Guidelines on identification evidence.
    Document Currently In Force R v Turner 2003
    Guidance on the basis for drawing adverse inferences from silence under section 34 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994.
    Document Currently In Force R v Tyrell 2004
    Duty of prosecutor and trial judge
    Document Currently In Force R v Upson 2009
    Successful admission of defendant's bad character where it was reasonable and clearly summed up by judge
    Document Currently In Force R v W and Another 2006
    ASBO Guidance: Service and admission of evidence and the form the order should take.
    Document Currently In Force R v W 2009
    A single incident over ten years earlier could be used as evidence of a propensity to commit an offence
    Document Currently In Force R v W 2013
    Evidence of similar fraudulent insurance claims by relatives of the offender was admissible, but the judge was correct in directing the jury that there was no such thing as guilt by association.
    Document Currently In Force R v Warner - R v Jones 1993
    Allow in court the convictions of visitors to drug dealers
    Document Currently In Force R v Waters 1997
    Sudden 'loss of memory' during testimony due to fear
    Document Currently In Force R v Watts 2010
    special measures should enable complainants to give evidence or to improve the quality of their evidence despite their having major communication difficulties.
    Document Currently In Force R v Webber 2004
    Positive suggestion put to a witness can fall within section 34 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994.
    Document Currently In Force R v Weir 2005
    Propensity can be shown in other ways than conviction for offences of the same category
    Document Currently In Force R v West 2005
    PII - Disclosure - info held that could assist the defence
    Document Currently In Force R v Williams 1986
    Evidence of previous offences against same victim admissible to show motive and intent to carry threats through.
    Document Currently In Force R v Woodhouse 2009
    A single historic incident may be capable of showing propensity
    Document Currently In Force R v Wright 1989
    Use of articles as evidence to give or correct an impression.
    Document Currently In Force R v Xhabri 2005
    Guidance on sections 114 and 120 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003.
    Document Currently In Force R v Y 2008
    Hearsay statement contained in, or associated with, a confession are admissible under section 114 Criminal Justice Act 2003.
    Document Currently In Force R v Yu and another 2006
    Guidance on the test where witness is unavailable
    Document Currently In Force R v Z 2000
    Use of previous acquittal case facts allowed provided there is no risk of double jeopardy.
    Document Currently In Force R v Z 2009
    Guidance on admitting hearsay evidence of bad character
    Document Currently In Force Re B and another (children) (allegation of sexual abuse: child's evidence) 2006
    Effect of failing to follow achieving best evidence guidelines - child interviews
    Document Currently In Force Rose v DPP 2006
    More than one person must see act to make out offence
    Document Currently In Force Sak v CPS 2007
    Guidance on the use of sections 114 or 116 for the admission evidence as hearsay when a witness is unavailable.
    Document Currently In Force Smith v DPP 2006
    Figures from roadside test of no real significance as evidence but should be disclosed where available as good practice
    Document Currently In Force Sneyd v DPP 2006
    Breath Tests - time of caution/proving calibration of intoximeter
    Document Currently In Force Tahery v UK 2006
    Prevention of testing evidence amounting to sole or principal prosecution evidence violates article 6.
    Document Currently In Force Taylor v CC of Cheshire 1987
    When the video tape of the crime is lost before trial
    Document Currently In Force Toth v Jarman 2006
    Expert must disclose any conflict of interest.
    Document Currently In Force Ukpabi v DPP 2008
    assault on constables - standard of proof has to be clear and must be beyond reasonable doubt
    Document Currently In Force Van Colle and another v Chief Constable of Hertfordshire 2007
    Intimidation of witnesses - police duty to protect
    Document Currently In Force Vehicle and Operator Services Agency v Greenfarms Ltd 2005
    Points to prove to show a modified vehicle has changed class.
    Document Currently In Force Wellington v DPP 2007
    Aliases in a PNC printout can be admitted as evidence without the requirement for a description of the circumstances in which they are used.
    Document Currently In Force Whitmarsh v DPP 2000
    Identification - section 9 CJA 1967 statement can be sufficient evidence without using inferences
    Document Currently In Force Williams v VOSA 2008
    No requirement for express agreement regarding admission of hearsay under section 114(c) CJA 2003 particularly if raised during disclosure and no objection raised then.
    Document Currently In Force Wood v DPP 2010
    Police officer's signed witness statement - an identical unsigned copy served under section 9 of the CJA 1967, fulfils the section's requirements

    PNLD
    • TSI Corporate Affiliate Member
    • Powered by Foundations
    • BSI
    © Copyright 2014 PNLD