LAWS2207: Evidence
Final Exam Notes
Criminal proceedings, maker available .................................... 8
Exception: lay opinion................................................................ 14
Contemporaneous statements about a person’s health etc ........ 8
Exception: expert opinion .......................................................... 14
Exceptions – second-hand hearsay ............................................... 8
Requirements .......................................................................... 14
Business records ....................................................................... 8
Other exceptions......................................................................... 15
Tags and labels ......................................................................... 9
Opinion of an ATSI person .................................................... 15
Electronic communications ...................................................... 9
Admissions ............................................................................. 15
ATSI laws and customs .......................................................... 10
Credibility .............................................................................. 15
Reputation as to relationships and age .................................... 10
Evidence of an accused’s good character ............................... 16
Contents
PRELIMINARY ISSUES................................................................. 3
ADMISSIBILITY............................................................................. 3
(1)
RELEVANCE .................................................................... 3
Public or general rights ........................................................... 10
When will evidence be relevant? .................................................. 3
If it were accepted..................................................................... 3
Key cases – examples ............................................................... 3
(2)
(a) HEARSAY .................................................................... 4
(4)
JUDGMENTS AND CONVICTIONS ............................. 16
Excluding evidence .................................................................... 10
Exclusion of evidence of judgments and convictions ................. 16
(2) (b) ADMISSIONS .................................................................... 10
Issuing of a certificate ................................................................ 16
Is it an admission? ...................................................................... 10
(5)
TENDENCY AND COINCIDENCE ............................... 16
Admissions hearsay exception (s 81) ......................................... 10
Is the evidence relevant for tendency and coincidence? ............. 16
Prosecution’s duty to tender/play a record of interview?........ 10
Can the evidence be used for tendency and coincidence? .......... 16
Is it a first-hand admission? (s 82) .............................................. 10
Tendency ................................................................................ 16
Safeguards .................................................................................. 11
Coincidence ............................................................................ 16
Made by a person...................................................................... 4
Exclusion of admissions influenced by violent, oppressive,
inhumane or degrading conduct (s 84) ................................... 11
Has notice been given if it is going to be used for a
tendency/coincidence purpose? .................................................. 16
Prove the existence of a fact that it can reasonably be supposed
that the person intended to assert by the representation ............ 4
Reliability of admissions (s 85) .............................................. 11
Tendency ................................................................................ 16
Possible illegalities under s 138.................................................. 12
Coincidence ............................................................................ 16
Cautioning .............................................................................. 12
Is there significant probative value? ........................................... 16
Silence .................................................................................... 12
Tendency ................................................................................ 16
Statutory recording requirements ........................................... 12
Coincidence ............................................................................ 17
Exclusion of records of oral questioning (s 86) ...................... 12
In criminal proceedings, does the probative value of the tendency
and/or coincidence evidence outweigh the prejudicial effect on
the defendant? ............................................................................ 17
S 59 EA: Excluding hearsay ......................................................... 4
Requirements ............................................................................ 4
Approach for problem questions............................................... 4
Previous representation............................................................. 4
Examples .................................................................................. 4
S 60 EA: non-hearsay purposes .................................................... 5
What it means? ......................................................................... 5
Purpose ..................................................................................... 5
Limiting evidence admitted under s 60 EA ............................... 5
Exceptions if it is first-hand hearsay............................................. 5
Public policy and fairness discretions (s 138 & s 90) ................. 12
Excluding improperly or illegally obtained evidence (s 138) →
public policy question............................................................. 13
Is the person competent? .......................................................... 5
Restrictions ............................................................................... 6
Notice ....................................................................................... 6
Criminal proceedings, maker unavailable ................................. 6
Unfair to the defendant to use the evidence (s 90) .................. 13
(3)
OPINION EVIDENCE ..................................................... 14
Is it an opinion? .......................................................................... 14
1
Balancing act .......................................................................... 18
Probative value ....................................................................... 18
Unfair prejudice...................................................................... 18
Cannot tender past criminal record ............................................. 18
(6)
(a) CREDIBILITY ............................................................ 18
Relevance ................................................................................... 18
Meaning of credibility ............................................................ 18
Factors to consider .................................................................. 18
Credibility rule............................................................................ 18
Exceptions .................................................................................. 19
Evidence being led in cross-examination of witness .............. 19
Evidence being led in chief to rebut a denial in crossexamination ............................................................................ 19
(8)
EXCLUDING EVIDENCE & WARNINGS .................... 24
S 137 EA: Where the risk of unfair prejudice outweighs the
probative value ........................................................................... 24
Balancing incommensurables ................................................. 24
Probative value ....................................................................... 24
Unfair prejudice ...................................................................... 24
S 138: Evidence was obtained improperly or illegally ............... 25
Onus ....................................................................................... 25
In consequence of an impropriety or illegality (s138(1)(b)) ... 25
Evidence of a prior consistent statement ................................ 19
Impropriety ............................................................................. 25
Evidence of specialised knowledge ........................................ 20
Factors to be considered ......................................................... 25
Evidence of a previous representation admitted and maker is
not called to give evidence ..................................................... 20
Case examples ........................................................................ 26
(6) (b) CHARACTER ..................................................................... 21
Relevance?.................................................................................. 21
Criminal proceeding ................................................................... 21
S 165: Warnings for unreliable evidence .................................... 26
Types of evidence it applies to ............................................... 26
Warning .................................................................................. 26
CONCLUSION .............................................................................. 26
Evidence about character of accused people .............................. 21
Leave required to cross examine about character of the accused 21
Jury directions ............................................................................ 21
Use of bad character evidence in rebuttal ................................... 22
(7)
IDENTIFICATION EVIDENCE...................................... 22
Is it identification evidence? ....................................................... 22
Is it visual identification evidence? ............................................ 22
Definition................................................................................ 22
Is the visual identification evidence admissible? .................... 22
Is it picture identification evidence? ........................................... 23
Definitions .............................................................................. 23
Is the picture identification evidence admissible? .................. 23
Direction if identification evidence is admissible ....................... 23
Can it be excluded under s 137? ................................................. 23
2
PRELIMINARY ISSUES
•
•
•
•
The facts in issue are the issues in the proceedings defined by
substantive law (Smith) → state what they are based on the
charge
NOTE ABOUT COMPETENCY: If they have a mental,
physical or intellectual disability OR are a child they may not
be competent to give evidence about a fact (s 13A(1) EA)
As the trial will take place in the ACT Supreme Court, the
Evidence Act 2011 (ACT) (‘EA’) applies (s 4). All sections
relate to the EA unless stated otherwise.
FOR EACH STATEMENT: State the relevance of it
generally and which paragraphs are problematic
ADMISSIBILITY
(1)
•
•
•
RELEVANCE
Note: This is the first thing to consider for ALL admissibility
provisions – is the evidence relevant?
Evidence is that is relevant in a proceeding is admissible
unless otherwise provided by the act (s 56(1) EA)
Evidence that is not relevant is not admissible in the
proceeding (s 56(2) EA)
•
When will evidence be relevant?
•
•
•
The evidence that is relevant in a proceeding is evidence that,
if it were accepted, could rationally affect (directly or
indirectly) the assessment of the probability of the existence
of a fact in issue in the proceeding (s 55(1) EA)
There needs to be a minimal logical connection between
evidence and a fact in issue (Smith)
Evidence is generally admissible only if it tends to prove a
fact in issue or a fact relevant to a fact in issue (Goldsmith v
Sandilands)
If it were accepted
•
A court assesses “the probability of the existence of a fact in
issue” on the assumption that the evidence is reliable
(Papakosmas v The Queen)
Key cases – examples
•
Smith v The Queen: Smith partook in a bank robbery and
there was CCTV footage of a man robbing the bank. Two
police officers gave evidence that Smith was in the photos but
there was no evidence that the police were in a better position
to compare the image of the photograph with the accused
compared to the jury
o Not relevant → As the police assertion of identity was
founded on material no different from the jury’s, the
police’s evidence that he recognised the appellant is
not evidence that could rationally affect the
assessment by the jury of the question we have
identified
o If the appearance of the accused looks different to
how the accused looks at the time of the trial then
3
•
evidence of how the accused looked at the time of the
offence would not be irrelevant
Papakosmas v The Queen: The accused was convicted of
sexually assaulting a fellow employee. Three witnesses gave
evidence whereby the complainant told them about the
incident
o Relevant → The evidence, if accepted, could
rationally affect the assessment of the probability of a
fact in issue in the proceedings, the fact being that the
complainant did not consent to have intercourse with
the appellant and that the victim had complained
about the assault at the first reasonable opportunity
Evans v The Queen: Armed robbery and involved security
camera footage and they photographed a man in sunglasses,
balaclava and overalls. Appellant was asked to walk
backwards and forwards in the overalls and say some of the
words the robber said
o Gummow and Hayne JJ: not relevant → Comparison
could have been drawn without asking the appellant to
dress up and this information could not rationally
affect, directly or indirectly, the determination of any
fact in issue.
− It revealed nothing about the wearer and
nothing about the appellant that was not
already apparent to the jury observing him in
the dock.
o Heydon and Crennan J: relevant → The appearance of
the accused walking in overalls in front of the jury
was capable of making an impression on the jury that
was both favourable and adverse to the accused
o Kirby J: relevant → in assessing probability one fact
is whether the appellant was the offender who had
committed the alleged crimes.
− There were apparent similarities, in the jury's
view, between the appearance and conduct of
the appellant and the earlier evidence and
descriptions given
− Note: Excluded evidence due to unfair
prejudice for the accused
Evidence of an accused’s good character
•
The opinion rule does not apply to evidence presented by a
defendant to prove (directly or by implication) that the
defendant is, either generally or in a particular respect, a
person of good character (s 110(1) EA)
Can the evidence be used for tendency and
coincidence?
•
JUDGMENTS AND
CONVICTIONS
Exclusion of evidence of judgments and
convictions
•
•
S 91 prohibits the use of evidence of a decision, or a finding
of fact, in Australian or overseas proceeding, to prove the
existence of a fact that was in issue in that proceeding (s
91(1) EA)
Such evidence is not admissible to prove the existence of a
fact even if the decision or finding of fact is relevant for
another purpose (s 91(2) EA).
Issuing of a certificate
•
TENDENCY AND
COINCIDENCE
Is the evidence relevant for tendency and
coincidence?
•
•
•
Note that the tendency and coincidence evidence must be
relevant to prove a fact in issue (s 55, 56 EA)
Part 3.6 does not apply to evidence that relates only to the
witness’ credibility (s 94(1) EA)
If evidence is admissible for another purpose it is NOT
automatically admissible for these tendency and coincidence
purposes (s 95(1) EA)
o Clear judicial warning may be necessary in this regard
(OGD)
Tendency evidence is defined in the Dictionary as evidence
referred to in s 97(1). This is evidence of character, reputation
or conduct of a person or a tendency that a person has or had
(s 97(1) EA)
Applied to evidence of past conduct, tendency reasoning is no
more sophisticated than: he did it before; he has a
propensity(tendency) to do this sort of thing; the likelihood is
that he did it again on the occasion in issue (Hughes)
•
•
•
Coincidence
•
•
A conviction in other proceedings may be established by a
certificate stating the fact of the conviction (s 178(1)(a) EA),
given pursuant to s 178(2) EA which proves that fact
(5)
•
•
•
First identify the purpose for which the evidence is tendered
(IMM)
Tendency
(4)
Is there significant probative value?
Coincidence evidence is defined in the Dictionary as evidence
referred to in s 98(1). This is evidence that 2 or more events
happened and with regard to their similarities it is improbable
that the events happened coincidentally (s 98(1) EA)
There is established to have been two events in circumstances
where the existence of one event establishes the likelihood
that the defendant was responsible for, or involved in, the
other separate event or to establish that the other of those
events did not occur by accident (Hughes)
•
•
Has notice been given if it is going to be
used for a tendency/coincidence purpose?
Tendency
•
If the evidence is being adduced to prove that a person has or
had a tendency to act in a particular way or have a state of
mind, reasonable notice in writing must be given to the other
party (s 97(1)(a) EA)
In determining the probative value, it is not open to the court
to have regard to the possibility that the evidence may be the
result of collusion, concoction or contamination (s 94(5) EA)
– i.e. cannot consider reliability or credibility of the evidence
or witness (IMM)
In seeking to present the tendency and/or coincidence
evidence it must have significant probative value (s 97(1)(b)/
s 98(1)(b) EA)
Tendency/coincidence evidence will have significant
probative value if it could rationally affect the assessment of
the probability of the existence of a fact in issue to a
significant extent (Hughes) → identify the fact in issue which
needs to be proved
“Significant” probative value must mean something more
than mere relevance but something less than a “substantial”
degree of relevance (Lockyer)
In cases where there is evidence from a source independent of
the complainant, the requisite degree of probative value is
more likely to be met (IMM)
General factors to consider are:
o The nature of proceedings
o The issue to which the evidence is relevant
o The number of occasions
o The time gaps between
o Degree of specificity/generality
o Degree of similarity in conduct
o Degree of similarity in circumstances
o Whether evidence is in dispute
o Tendency statutory language does not direct focus to
similarities
Tendency
No need for similarities
•
Coincidence
•
If the evidence is being adduced to prove that it is improbable
that 2 or more events happened coincidentally, reasonable
notice in writing must be given to the other party (s 98(1)(a)
EA)
16
There is no condition that the admission of tendency evidence
is that similarities with the conduct in issue need to be present
(Hughes)