Principles and procedures to admit and exclude evidence - Grounds for admitting hearsay

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising from the use of the content on this page. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.

Overview

Hearsay evidence admissibility is an essential component of criminal law, balancing need for trustworthy evidence with right to fair trial. For those studying for SQE1 FLK2 exam, understanding rules and procedures surrounding hearsay evidence is necessary. This article examines statutes, common law, procedures, and practical difficulties connected to hearsay evidence in criminal trials.

The Legal Framework for Hearsay Evidence

Statutory Provisions: The Criminal Justice Act 2003

The Criminal Justice Act 2003 (CJA 2003) forms basis for hearsay admissibility in England and Wales, outlining when hearsay evidence can be admitted.

Unavailable Witnesses

Section 116(1) of CJA 2003 allows hearsay evidence if witness cannot give evidence. Requirements include:

  • Relevance to case
  • Sufficient reliability indicators
  • Correct identification of statement maker
  • Adequate notice to other parties

Business Records

Section 117(1) permits use of business records if they meet specific conditions:

  • Regular creation during business activities
  • Timely documentation
  • Reliable grounds
  • Adequate notice to other parties

Common Law Principles

Beyond statutory rules, common law extends hearsay admissibility in certain scenarios.

Confessions

A defendant's confession can be admitted if made voluntarily. The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) ensures confessions voluntary.

Res Gestae

Res gestae admits statements made spontaneously during or immediately after an event, recognizing their automatic reliability.

Other Common Law Exceptions

Additional exceptions include:

  • Dying declarations
  • Personal or family history statements
  • Statements against interest
  • Reputation statements

Party Agreement and Justice Considerations

Parties can agree to admit hearsay, even outside statutory or common law exceptions. Courts may also allow hearsay in interest of justice, adding flexibility in special cases.

Procedural Aspects

Criminal Procedure Rules

The Criminal Procedure Rules (CPR) set guidelines for presenting hearsay evidence, covering:

  • Notification requirements for hearsay evidence
  • Procedures to contest hearsay admissibility
  • Timelines for objections and responses

Key Case Studies

R v. Kearley (1992)

This case held that implied assertions could be hearsay. Though updated by CJA 2003, it remains relevant for its analysis of hearsay implications on fair trials.

R v. Horncastle (2009)

This Supreme Court ruling examined UK's hearsay regulations against Article 6 of European Convention on Human Rights, affirming that CJA 2003 provides necessary safeguards for fair trials.

Practical Challenges and Strategic Considerations

Legal professionals face various challenges with hearsay evidence:

  1. Evaluating statement reliability without original speaker
  2. Weighing probative value against bias
  3. Strategically using hearsay provisions for client benefit
  4. Following procedural rules
  5. Formulating strong arguments for or against hearsay

Examples and Applications

Example 1: Witness Unavailability in Robbery Case

In robbery case, key witness is too ill to attend court. The prosecution wants to use witness's statement given to police post-robbery, possibly admissible under Section 116 of CJA 2003, meeting criteria for relevance, reliability, and proper identification.

Example 2: Business Records in Fraud Case

In fraud investigation, emails between executives about suspicious transactions might be admitted under Section 117 of CJA 2003, provided they follow reliability standards.

Example 3: Res Gestae in Domestic Abuse Case

During domestic abuse trial, victim's immediate statement, "He's going to kill me!" after an incident, may be allowed under res gestae for its timely and spontaneous nature.

Conclusion

Understanding hearsay evidence rules is vital for SQE1 FLK2 exam and legal practice. The mix of statutory provisions, common law, and procedural rules creates complex but flexible system for hearsay issues in criminal trials. By understanding these elements, legal professionals can handle hearsay evidence effectively, ensuring relevant and fair trials.

Key points:

  • CJA 2003 outlines main statutory rules for hearsay
  • Common law still influences hearsay handling
  • Procedural rules, including notification and objections, key
  • Case law, such as R v. Horncastle, offers important context
  • Practical issues include reliability assessment, value balancing, and strategic use of hearsay