[2008] UKPC 34

The court considered the Evidence Act 1843 (Jamaica) s.31D and found that a trial judge had been correct to order the admissibility of the deposition of the chief witness instead of hearing his oral testimony where the witness had received threats of bodily harm and feared for his life. Although the deposition was prejudicial in the sense that it was vital evidence against the accused, that was not a ground for invoking the court's discretion under s.31L of the Act not to admit it.

PC (Jam) (Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Lord Carswell, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood)

23/06/2008

0 comments… add one

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Skip to toolbar