Communications made by a defendant after the commission of an offence which culminated in the altering of evidence was probative and relevant evidence of his involvement in the offence for the jury to evaluate, as was the evidence of the tampering itself. Evidence of a defendant's disappearance from the locality immediately after the offence was also probative and admissible if sufficiently linked in time and circumstance.

CA (Crim Div) (Judge LJ, Holman J, Andrew Smith J)

13/10/2000

0 comments… add one

Leave a Comment

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

Skip to toolbar