Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Since 1987, the possibility of the ambush defence has been much reduced by The Crown Court (Advance Notice of Expert Evidence) Rules 1987, made under section 81 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, which in essence require the defence to provide the prosecution with copies of expert witness reports in sufficient time for the ...
Precognition in Scots law is the practice of precognoscing a witness, that is the taking of a factual statement from witnesses by both prosecution and defence after indictment or claim but before trial. This is often undertaken by trainee lawyers or precognition officers employed by firms; anecdotal evidence suggests many of these are former ...
On the second day of defence evidence, eleven people were arrested for alleged contempt of court after protesting outside the court holding signs saying "jurors have the right to hear the whole truth". By the final day there were more than 80 protestors outside the courtroom. [7] The court dropped its proceedings against those arrested. [5]
Asked for her opinion on the teenager’s defence case statement, she replied: “If the 17-year-old has only jabbed once at one of the males and swiped at the other male, I would have a low ...
The accused may serve a statement of uncontroversial evidence on the procurator fiscal and the court. A defence solicitor can undertake this on the accused behalf. If the procurator fiscal does not respond the evidence in the statement is taken as proven for the purposes of the trial. [3]
Contents of the Defence Case Statement 6A Contents of defence statement (1) For the purposes of this Part a defence statement is a written statement— (a) setting out the nature of the accused's defence, including any particular defences on which he intends to rely, (b) indicating the matters of fact on which he takes issue with the prosecution,
Wesley-Smith then wrote to Crown Law about the case. He provided them with court documents, Turner’s police statements, an affidavit from Turner saying his evidence had been changed without his knowledge and asked for a response to this evidence. Crown Law replied saying it wasn’t possible for the Crown to examine Hall’s conviction.
Examined in his case, counsel for the Crown accepted the refusal to have a blood transfusion was a cause of the death. [2] The defence argued that the refusal to accept medical treatment broke the chain of causation (in modern comparative and ancient law in Latin this is called a novus actus interveniens) between the stabbing and her death.