Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Criminal Justice Act 2003 provides for seven statutory gateways for adducing bad character evidence of defendants: [9] (a) all parties to the proceedings agree to the evidence being admissible, (b) the evidence is adduced by the defendant himself or is given in answer to a question asked by him in cross-examination and intended to elicit it,
The admissibility of character evidence to allow the defendant to prove the character trait of a victim is limited, however, if the lawsuit is for rape or assault with the intent to commit rape. If the reputation or opinion evidence is being offered by the defendant to show the rape victim's past sexual conduct, character evidence is inadmissible.
The common law in respect of good and bad character, reputation or family tradition is also preserved. [15] The Act moves some of the focus of hearsay evidence to weight, rather than admissibility, setting out considerations in assessing the evidence (set out in summary form): [16]
Nurses and midwives accused of serious sexual, physical and racial abuse are being allowed to keep working on wards because whistleblowers are being ignored, a damning new report has found.. Staff ...
This occurs when a person in a position of power, such as a nurse manager or head nurse, bullies a person in lesser power, such as a staff nurse. [12] Lateral violence occurs when one staff nurse were to harass another staff nurse, with neither of them being in a higher position of power than the other.
Even neutral questions can lead witnesses to answers based on word choice, response framing, assumptions made, and form. The words "fast", "collision" and "How", for example, can alter speed estimates provided by respondents. [6] When someone asks a leading question, they expect the other person to agree with the leading question.
In Canada, the rule is established in R. v. Handy, 164 CCC (3d) 481, 2 SCR 908 (2002): . Evidence of prior bad acts by the accused will be admissible if the prosecution satisfies the judge on a balance of probabilities that, in the context of the particular case, the probative value of the evidence in relation to a specific issue outweighs its potential prejudice and thereby justifies its ...
Get AOL Mail for FREE! Manage your email like never before with travel, photo & document views. Personalize your inbox with themes & tabs. You've Got Mail!