BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
The Law Commission |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> The Law Commission >> Evidence in Criminal Proceedings: Hearsay and related topics [1997] EWLC 245 (19 June 1997) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/other/EWLC/1997/245.html Cite as: [1997] EWLC 245 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Law Commission Report 245
SUMMARY |
Summary | ||||
PART I: INTRODUCTION |
1.1-1.59 | ||||
|
Background to this project |
1.1 | ||||
|
Our approach |
1.4 | ||||
|
Need for codification of the law of evidence |
1.6 | ||||
|
The provisional proposals in the consultation paper |
1.15 | ||||
|
The consultation process |
1.22 | ||||
|
Developments since the publication of the consultation paper |
1.27 | ||||
|
Summary of principal recommendations |
1.29-1.54 | ||||
|
Structure of this report |
1.59 | ||||
PART II: THE PRESENT LAW |
2.1-2.20 | ||||
|
The rule itself |
2.2 | ||||
|
The exceptions to the rule created before 1988 |
2.6-2.11 | ||||
|
The Criminal Justice Act 1988 |
2.12 | ||||
|
The Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 |
2.20 | ||||
PART III: THE JUSTIFICATIONS OF THE HEARSAY RULE |
3.1-3.38 | ||||
|
Conclusions |
3.37 | ||||
PART IV: IS THERE A NEED TO CHANGE THE PRESENT LAW? |
4.1-4.60 | ||||
|
The exclusion of cogent evidence |
4.3-4.27 | ||||
|
Evidence tendered by the defence |
4.4-4.13 | ||||
|
Evidence tendered by the prosecution |
4.14-4.4.27 | ||||
|
Judicial discretion |
4.28-4.31 | ||||
|
The complexity of the rule and the exceptions |
4.32-4.53 | ||||
|
The rule leads to a waste of court time |
4.54 | ||||
|
The rule "often confuses witnesses and prevents them from telling their story in the witness-box in the natural way" |
4.56 | ||||
|
Summary of criticisms of the rule |
4.58 | ||||
|
Option 1: no change |
4.60 | ||||
PART V: THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS |
5.1-5.41 | ||||
|
Article 6 |
5.3-5.5.25 | ||||
|
The right of the defendant to adduce hearsay evidence |
5.25 | ||||
|
Provisional conclusions in the consultation paper |
5.26-5.32 | ||||
|
The response on consultation |
5.33-5.40 | ||||
|
Conclusion |
5.41 | ||||
PART VI: THE SIX OPTIONS FOR REFORM |
6.1-6.48 | ||||
|
Option 2: the free admissibility approach |
6.3-6.16 | ||||
|
Advantages |
6.4-6.7 | ||||
|
Disadvantages |
6.8-6.14 | ||||
|
The response on consultation |
6.15-6.16 | ||||
|
Option 3: the "best available evidence" principle |
6.17-6.32 | ||||
|
Option 4: an exclusionary rule with an inclusionary discretion |
6.33-6.37 | ||||
|
Option 5: adding an inclusionary discretion to the existing system |
6.38-6.42 | ||||
|
Option 6: categories of automatically admissible evidence |
6.43-6.47 | ||||
|
Option 7: categories of automatic admissibility plus a limited inclusionary discretion |
6.48 | ||||
PART VII: THE FORMULATION OF A RULE AGAINST HEARSAY |
7.1-7.46 | ||||
|
Assertions and direct evidence |
7.2-7.41 | ||||
|
Borderline cases |
7.5-7.16 | ||||
|
Our provisional proposal: intention to assert |
7.17-7.23 | ||||
|
Modification of the provisional proposal |
7.24-7.35 | ||||
|
Our recommended formulation |
7.40-7.41 | ||||
|
Statements produced by machines |
7.42-7.46 | ||||
PART VIII: THE EXCEPTIONS TO THE RULE |
8.1-8.150 | ||||
|
Statements by persons who are unavailable |
8.3 | ||||
|
What kinds of hearsay should be automatically admissible? |
8.4-8.33 | ||||
|
What kinds of unavailability should make the statement admissible? |
8.34-8.47 | ||||
|
Fear |
8.48-8.70 | ||||
|
Business documents |
8.71-8.83 | ||||
|
Confessions, mixed statements and denials |
8.84-8.99 | ||||
|
Other statutory exceptions |
8.100-8.108 | ||||
|
Existing common law exceptions |
8.114-8.132 | ||||
|
The safety-valve: an inclusionary discretion |
8.133-8.149 | ||||
|
Admitting hearsay by consent |
8.150 | ||||
PART IX: EXPERT EVIDENCE |
9.1-9.29 | ||||
|
The present law: exceptions |
9.3-9.9 | ||||
|
Problems with the present law |
9.10-9.11 | ||||
|
Options for reform considered in the consultation paper |
9.12-9.22 | ||||
|
Our recommendation |
9.23-9.29 | ||||
PART X: PREVIOUS STATEMENTS BY WITNESSES |
10.1-10.99 | ||||
|
Previous consistent statements |
10.2 | ||||
|
Summary of the present law |
10.2-10.10 | ||||
|
Justifications and criticisms of the rule against previous consistent statements |
10.11-10.26 | ||||
|
The options and the response on consultation |
10.27-10.38 | ||||
|
10.28-10.29 | ||||
|
10.30-10.34 | ||||
|
10.35-10.38 | ||||
|
General considerations |
10.39-10.40 | ||||
|
The recommended exceptions |
10.41-10.61 | ||||
|
Documentary statements as exhibits |
10.62 | ||||
|
Previous statements which take the place of or supplement oral testimony |
10.63 | ||||
|
Inability to remember |
10.63-10.82 | ||||
|
Children's evidence recorded on video |
10.83-10.86 | ||||
|
Previous inconsistent statements |
10.87 | ||||
|
Summary of the present law |
10.88 | ||||
|
Criticism of the present law |
10.89 | ||||
|
The proposed reform |
10.91 | ||||
|
10.99 | ||||
PART XI: SAFEGUARDS FOR THE PARTY AGAINST WHOM HEARSAY EVIDENCE IS ADDUCED |
11.1-11.36 | ||||
|
Disclosure of the prosecution case |
11.2 | ||||
|
Safeguards inherent in our recommended scheme |
11.3-11.5 | ||||
|
Formal notice to be given |
11.6-11.7 | ||||
|
Application for a ruling on admissibility to be made pre-trial where possible |
11.8-11.11 | ||||
|
The burden of proof |
11.12 | ||||
|
The standard of proof |
11.13-11.14 | ||||
|
Judicial discretions |
11.15 | ||||
|
An additional power to exclude evidence |
11.16-11.18 | ||||
|
The right to challenge the credibility of the absent declarant |
11.19-11.25 | ||||
|
The court's duty to stop the trial |
11.26-11.32 | ||||
|
The judge's direction to the jury |
11.33-11.35 | ||||
|
A possible further safeguard |
11.36 | ||||
PART XII: PROCEDURAL MATTERS |
12.1-12.15 | ||||
|
Application of the rules |
12.1-12.12 | ||||
|
Courts-martial |
12.9 | ||||
|
Professional tribunals |
12.10 | ||||
|
Coroners' courts |
12.11 | ||||
|
Trial procedure |
12.13-12.15 | ||||
PART XIII: COMPUTER EVIDENCE |
13.1-13.23 | ||||
|
PACE, section 69 |
13.4-13.5 | ||||
|
Problems with the present law |
13.6-13.14 | ||||
|
Response on consultation |
13.15-13.22 | ||||
|
Our recommendation |
13.23 | ||||
PART XIV: OUR RECOMMENDATIONS |
Summary | ||||
|
The rule against hearsay |
1 | ||||
|
The exceptions to the rule |
2 | ||||
|
The unavailability exception |
3 | ||||
|
Fear |
4 | ||||
|
Business documents |
5 | ||||
|
Confessions, mixed statements and denials |
6 | ||||
|
Evidence given at an earlier trial |
7 | ||||
|
The Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 |
8 | ||||
|
Res gestae |
9 | ||||
|
The common enterprise exception |
10 | ||||
|
Other common law exceptions |
11 | ||||
|
The safety valve |
12 | ||||
|
Admitting hearsay by consent |
13 | ||||
|
Expert evidence |
14 | ||||
|
Previous statements by witnesses |
15 | ||||
|
Suggestion of late invention |
16 | ||||
|
Evidence of a previous identification or description |
17 | ||||
|
Recent complaint |
18 | ||||
|
Documentary statements as exhibits |
19 | ||||
|
Inability to remember |
20 | ||||
|
Previous inconsistent statements |
21 | ||||
|
Safeguards for the party against whom hearsay evidence is adduced |
22 | ||||
|
Formal notice to be given |
23 | ||||
|
Application for a ruling on admissibility to be made pre-trial where possible |
24 | ||||
|
An additional power to exclude evidence |
25 | ||||
|
Right to challenge the credibility of the absent declarant |
26 | ||||
|
The court's duty to stop the trial |
27 | ||||
|
Procedural matters |
28 | ||||
|
Computer evidence |
29 | ||||
APPENDIX A: DRAFT CRIMINAL EVIDENCE BILL |
Appendix A | ||||
APPENDIX B: EXTRACTS FROM RELEVANT LEGISLATION
|
Appendix B | ||||
APPENDIX C: LIST OF THOSE WHO COMMENTED ON THE CONSULTATION PAPER |
Appendix C | ||||
APPENDIX D: PARTICIPANTS IN THE LAW COMMISSION SEMINAR ON CRIMINAL HEARSAY OF 10 FEBRUARY 1996 |
Appendix D | ||||
